Re: [Wikimedia-l] An encyclopedia must be conservative (?)

2020-05-27 Thread FRED BAUDER
Conservative in the sense that it contains significant information limited to 
that derived from reliable sources.

Progressive, to the extent we can include information that is not that well 
sourced but is derived from traditional sources or personal experience. For 
example the Hopi creation story, or a person's knowledge about their home town. 
With respect to medicine, I like to see information included that goes beyond 
the standard of care, but not with some aura of reliability attached to it, 
just the facts surrounding it, such as it being recent research or anecdotal 
reports of practitioners.

Wikipedia long ago lost the battle with respect to inclusion of some 
information which in only included due to the persistence of biased editors who 
have acquired skill in manipulating our guidelines. Generally, that tends to 
the authoritarian left. 

Fred Bauder

 
- Original Message -
From: Ziko van Dijk 
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Sent: Wed, 27 May 2020 09:36:20 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] An encyclopedia must be conservative (?)

Dear fellows,

Some time ago, Joseph Reagle wrote that an encyclopedia must be
progressive. In my personal view, something "progressive" sounds to me
intuitively more sympathetic than something "conservative". But of course,
these are only two words loaden with meaning, and reality is always more
complex.

It seems to me that many Wikipedians or Wikimedians think of themselves as
being progressive and modern. Our wikis are a tribute to science and
enlightenment. Spontaneity and a laissez-faire-attitude are held in high
regard; "productive chaos" and "anarchy" are typical for wikis.

When I had a closer look at our values and ideas, I got the impression that
the opposite is true. Many attitudes and ideals sound to me more like
bureaucracy and traditionalism:
* being thorough, with regard to content and writing about it
* community spirit
* treating everyone equally without regard of the person (the highest ideal
of the Prussian civil servant)
* individual initiative
* reliability

What do you think? Is this just my personal or national background, or has
Wikipedia been build up on a different basis than we usually tell ourselves
and others?

Kind regards
Ziko
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

2019-01-04 Thread FRED BAUDER
An executive summary is common at the head of many reports and articles. Only 
sections in the body of the article would be cited. Somewhat like a lede but 
more detailed. The main body of the article would still have a lede.

Fred Bauder



___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Official disclaimers

2018-06-27 Thread FRED BAUDER
Institutional memory. Why it said what it said in the first place.

Fred

- Original Message -
From: Szymon Grabarczuk 
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Sent: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 04:51:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Official disclaimers

Or Jimbo? :D

On Wed, 27 Jun 2018, 10:36 FRED BAUDER,  wrote:

> If you edit that page you should be aware of the legal implications of
> what you write. You can consult our lawyers or Jimbo if you need to. It
> should be tailored to whatever is unique about your language or nation. Not
> sure if there is some global policy somewhere. It is legal. It limits
> liability by notifying users of various realities, such as, we cannot, and
> do not, guarantee reliability, so use at your own risk.
>
> Fred Bauder
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Amir E. Aharoni 
> To: wikimedia-l 
> Sent: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 03:50:02 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Official disclaimers
>
> Hi,
>
> All WMF wikis have a "Disclaimers" link at the bottom.
>
> The target page often includes language that sounds legal, but they can be
> edited by people who don't have any official legal role or certification.
>
> Is there a general, global policy about how the name of this link is
> translated, and about what is written on the page where it leads?
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> ___
> 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,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Official disclaimers

2018-06-27 Thread FRED BAUDER
If you edit that page you should be aware of the legal implications of what you 
write. You can consult our lawyers or Jimbo if you need to. It should be 
tailored to whatever is unique about your language or nation. Not sure if there 
is some global policy somewhere. It is legal. It limits liability by notifying 
users of various realities, such as, we cannot, and do not, guarantee 
reliability, so use at your own risk.

Fred Bauder

- Original Message -
From: Amir E. Aharoni 
To: wikimedia-l 
Sent: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 03:50:02 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Official disclaimers

Hi,

All WMF wikis have a "Disclaimers" link at the bottom.

The target page often includes language that sounds legal, but they can be
edited by people who don't have any official legal role or certification.

Is there a general, global policy about how the name of this link is
translated, and about what is written on the page where it leads?

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-14 Thread FRED BAUDER
Very good. If any willing editor runs into trouble or is made to feel unwelcome 
or subjected to unfair criticism, that is the time to intervene. We are however 
not in a position to discourage women or minority editors from "recruiting" or 
encouraging other minority editors or women to edit. Any difficulties with that 
they will have to learn for themselves though experience with those they have 
recruited and feedback from them.

I think we can point out areas of knowledge that are poorly covered, as well as 
those that are overdone.

Fred

- Original Message -
From: Romaine Wiki 
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Sent: Mon, 14 May 2018 23:39:09 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

Was it the first time I noticed this subject in the Wikimedia movement, no.
It happens too many times that people get frustrated because the gender,
color of their skin or native background is the key reason to ask someone,
instead of the qualities that this person has.

There are two main reasons why I do not go into further detail:
1. the privacy of this individual is something I can't ignore
2. My previous email gives an example in a generic topic, and the topic is
not about an individual case.

Also is zooming in on an individual case not a solution, as we need to be
aware as movement how we are perceived by others.

I disagree that it is related to the attitude of an individual. The way how
someone will respond to it is depending on the attitude yes. But I think
that being asked for something just because of the colour of your face is
degrading you from being a person with various qualities and/or the work
you do. The possible demotivation is the result, but the core is in the
approach itself.

But yes, it is a difficult topic. But in this case it is much harder for
that individual who (temporarily?) gave up on editing/contributing.


I think it comes to inclusiveness, being able to include anyone independent
from how a face looks like. being inclusive to anyone, so that all the
knowledge of the world can be collected.
What we should not do is trying to be inclusive by being exclusive. We
should be making it possible for anyone to have a safe and pleasant space
and in that way bridge the gaps, instead of just trying to ask specific
people to come for the colour of their skin, etc. As said, that last thing
is creating gaps instead of closing them.

Romaine



2018-05-07 8:03 GMT+02:00 Amir E. Aharoni :

> This is a sensitive topic, and I'm a white man myself, so please slap me if
> I say something dumb.
>
> 2018-05-07 7:10 GMT+03:00 Romaine Wiki :
>
> >
> > What has happened?
> >
> > She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
> > 1. she is a woman
> > 2. she is from a minority
> > 3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
> > Europe/US)
> >
> > and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
> > mine (Caucasian).
> >
> > At the same time she has the impression that the work she does on the
> > Wikimedia wiki('s) is not valued, nor taken into account.
> >
>
> By whom?
>
> By the people who invited her?
>
> By other participants in the event?
>
> By other editors in the same wiki site?
>
> By the readers?
>
>
>
> > She does not want to be invited because she is a woman, nor because she
> is
> > from a minority, nor ... etc. This is offensive.
> > She only wants to be invited because of the work she contributes on
> > Wikipedia/etc.
> >
>
> This makes a lot of sense to me, but that's just me and attitudes are
> different for each person.
>
>
> > Besides the many good initiatives and intentions, this kind of approaches
> > to our contributors is demotivating them, please be aware of this.
>
>
> Again, it's probably demotivating to some. Maybe to 98%, maybe to 30%,
> maybe to 5%. I honestly don't know.
>
> I believe demotivation/frustration is the largest problem we face as
> > movement.
> >
>
> I don't know if its the biggest problem. On this mailing list we are a
> small group of meta-active Wikimedians, and we are the minority among
> editors. We don't actually represent all the editors. And of course the
> editors are a tiny minority compared to the readers.
>
> I'd argue that the hard time that some editors are giving newcomers is a
> bigger problem. Gender is certainly a part of that, and there are many
> other parts.
>
> We meta-wikimedians can find a better way to invite people to events, and
> we can change ourselves. That doesn't sound too hard. Changing the wider
> editor culture is harder.
>
> I heard from people that the problem described is called tokenism
> > .
> >
>
> Yes, that's when representation is given to a weakened group, but that
> representation is too weak to be meaningful, and may do more harm than
> good.
>
>
> > I believe the only 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-12 Thread FRED BAUDER
Publishers employ people who check out information in books being published. 
For accuracy and to avoid legal problems.

When I used Angela Davis's autobiography to write her article, there was a 
passage about her encountering racial bias in Germany when she was going to 
school there. Is that just her perception, or a fact? Knowing people, I had no 
problem using it as a fact, but people have objected and it is gone now.

Fred

- Original Message -
From: Paulo Santos Perneta <paulospern...@gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sat, 12 May 2018 08:53:40 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

It's reliable concerning the opinions and vision of the author on the
things he describes, not the facts themselves.

And unless I'm misunderstanding this, fact checkers (critics?) are actually
secondary sources, I believe?

Paulo

2018-05-12 13:48 GMT+01:00 FRED BAUDER <fredb...@fairpoint.net>:

> Autobiographical writing published by the mainstream press with editors
> and fact checkers is more reliable.
>
> Fred
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Paulo Santos Perneta <paulospern...@gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Sat, 12 May 2018 08:44:07 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>
> There is a difference between the two situations. The king's deed and the
> parish books are primary sources, but both are official documents, subject
> to peer review. Diaries and autobiographies are primary sources as well,
> but generally not subjected to any review. There should be some way to
> distinguish between the two types.
>
> Paulo
>
> 2018-05-12 13:40 GMT+01:00 FRED BAUDER <fredb...@fairpoint.net>:
>
> > And should be used, just as an image of a headstone can be used, in
> > preference to some writing about it. Exceptions, don't prove the rule
> > though. A diary should not be used directly, and an autobiography with
> > great care, depending on how it was edited and published.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: Paulo Santos Perneta <paulospern...@gmail.com>
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > Sent: Sat, 12 May 2018 08:27:06 -0400 (EDT)
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> >
> > A parish book, with all records signed by the priest (and witnesses), and
> > reviewed by the Diocesis, is a primary source, and immensely more
> reliable
> > than any secondary sources quoting it.
> >
> > As we say in Portugal, who tells a story adds something. I'm pretty much
> > sure there is a similar saying in English as well.
> >
> > There is not any reason that I can foresee why a secondary source should
> be
> > used instead of a primary source in those situations.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > 2018-05-12 6:49 GMT+01:00 Peter Southwood <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> :
> >
> > > Maybe there is, but maybe they are in fact conceptually similar, and
> have
> > > similar problems. You will have to clarify:
> > > In what way are primary sources "as in history" more reliable and
> > > verifiable?
> > > Also, how does "as in history" distinguish them from other primary
> > sources
> > > produced by the subject?
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Paulo Santos Perneta
> > > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 10:25 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > >
> > > Isn't there an endemic confusion in the Wikipedias between what are
> > primary
> > > sources (produced by the subject) and primary sources (original
> sources,
> > as
> > > in History)? While the first should be avoided at all costs, the second
> > > should be preferred over secondary sources most of the time, as they
> > > generally are more reliable and verifiable. I keep seeing this
> confusion
> > in
> > > Wikipedias, all the time, with disastrous results on the quality of the
> > > articles.
> > >
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > >
> > > 2018-05-11 5:49 GMT+01:00 Cameron <came...@cameron11598.net>:
> > >
> > > > Well audio recordings or video recordings of oral histories and
> > > traditions
> > > > come to mind. However I'

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-12 Thread FRED BAUDER
People often misinterpret the rules, occasionally in disingenuous ways. Best to 
not get too excited. Over the years there is a general gradual movement toward 
sane editing and a person who starts editing as a teenager should be a fairly 
good editor by the time they reach 50.

Fred


- Original Message -
From: Paulo Santos Perneta <paulospern...@gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sat, 12 May 2018 08:50:30 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

Yes, it should be as you say. But my experience in Wikipedia is that the
confuse definition of primary source often leads to such egregious
situations as some newspaper saying what the director of an institution is,
is prefered to the very institution correcting the name. I've seen this
over and over.

Paulo

2018-05-12 13:45 GMT+01:00 FRED BAUDER <fredb...@fairpoint.net>:

> Just as we allow a firm to list their officers or a town to correct the
> name of the mayor, if there are no factual issues, any source is fine. With
> respect to significant disputed issues professional  academic analysis is
> vital, think cold fusion.
>
> Fred
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Todd Allen <toddmal...@gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Sat, 12 May 2018 08:31:14 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>
> If a "secondary" source just parrots or copies a primary source, it's added
> nothing. At that point, it doesn't matter which one you use.
>
> However, good, reliable secondary sources will cross-check the claims of
> primary sources against one another, evaluate them for reliability, and
> come up with what the real truth is actually likely to be. When those
> sources are fact-checked and peer reviewed, they are much more reliable
> than the primary sources, and we should prefer them to editors evaluating
> primary sources themselves, or worse yet, uncritically treating them as
> factual.
>
> Todd
>
> On Sat, May 12, 2018 at 6:27 AM, Paulo Santos Perneta <
> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > A parish book, with all records signed by the priest (and witnesses), and
> > reviewed by the Diocesis, is a primary source, and immensely more
> reliable
> > than any secondary sources quoting it.
> >
> > As we say in Portugal, who tells a story adds something. I'm pretty much
> > sure there is a similar saying in English as well.
> >
> > There is not any reason that I can foresee why a secondary source should
> be
> > used instead of a primary source in those situations.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> > 2018-05-12 6:49 GMT+01:00 Peter Southwood <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> :
> >
> > > Maybe there is, but maybe they are in fact conceptually similar, and
> have
> > > similar problems. You will have to clarify:
> > > In what way are primary sources "as in history" more reliable and
> > > verifiable?
> > > Also, how does "as in history" distinguish them from other primary
> > sources
> > > produced by the subject?
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Paulo Santos Perneta
> > > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 10:25 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > >
> > > Isn't there an endemic confusion in the Wikipedias between what are
> > primary
> > > sources (produced by the subject) and primary sources (original
> sources,
> > as
> > > in History)? While the first should be avoided at all costs, the second
> > > should be preferred over secondary sources most of the time, as they
> > > generally are more reliable and verifiable. I keep seeing this
> confusion
> > in
> > > Wikipedias, all the time, with disastrous results on the quality of the
> > > articles.
> > >
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > >
> > > 2018-05-11 5:49 GMT+01:00 Cameron <came...@cameron11598.net>:
> > >
> > > > Well audio recordings or video recordings of oral histories and
> > > traditions
> > > > come to mind. However I'm not sure how comfortable I am with an
> > > > encyclopedia using such sources.
> > > >
> > > > Now as an aspiring historian (Only one semester left on my degree), I
> > use
> > > > primary sources quite often for paper

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-12 Thread FRED BAUDER
Autobiographical writing published by the mainstream press with editors and 
fact checkers is more reliable.

Fred

- Original Message -
From: Paulo Santos Perneta <paulospern...@gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Sat, 12 May 2018 08:44:07 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

There is a difference between the two situations. The king's deed and the
parish books are primary sources, but both are official documents, subject
to peer review. Diaries and autobiographies are primary sources as well,
but generally not subjected to any review. There should be some way to
distinguish between the two types.

Paulo

2018-05-12 13:40 GMT+01:00 FRED BAUDER <fredb...@fairpoint.net>:

> And should be used, just as an image of a headstone can be used, in
> preference to some writing about it. Exceptions, don't prove the rule
> though. A diary should not be used directly, and an autobiography with
> great care, depending on how it was edited and published.
>
> Fred
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: Paulo Santos Perneta <paulospern...@gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> Sent: Sat, 12 May 2018 08:27:06 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>
> A parish book, with all records signed by the priest (and witnesses), and
> reviewed by the Diocesis, is a primary source, and immensely more reliable
> than any secondary sources quoting it.
>
> As we say in Portugal, who tells a story adds something. I'm pretty much
> sure there is a similar saying in English as well.
>
> There is not any reason that I can foresee why a secondary source should be
> used instead of a primary source in those situations.
>
> Paulo
>
> 2018-05-12 6:49 GMT+01:00 Peter Southwood <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>:
>
> > Maybe there is, but maybe they are in fact conceptually similar, and have
> > similar problems. You will have to clarify:
> > In what way are primary sources "as in history" more reliable and
> > verifiable?
> > Also, how does "as in history" distinguish them from other primary
> sources
> > produced by the subject?
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Paulo Santos Perneta
> > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 10:25 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> >
> > Isn't there an endemic confusion in the Wikipedias between what are
> primary
> > sources (produced by the subject) and primary sources (original sources,
> as
> > in History)? While the first should be avoided at all costs, the second
> > should be preferred over secondary sources most of the time, as they
> > generally are more reliable and verifiable. I keep seeing this confusion
> in
> > Wikipedias, all the time, with disastrous results on the quality of the
> > articles.
> >
> > Paulo
> >
> >
> > 2018-05-11 5:49 GMT+01:00 Cameron <came...@cameron11598.net>:
> >
> > > Well audio recordings or video recordings of oral histories and
> > traditions
> > > come to mind. However I'm not sure how comfortable I am with an
> > > encyclopedia using such sources.
> > >
> > > Now as an aspiring historian (Only one semester left on my degree), I
> use
> > > primary sources quite often for papers, and projects however those are
> > > generally frowned upon for Wikipedia; mainly because Wikipedia is an
> > > encyclopedia not an academic journal. Good encyclopedias are typically
> > > sourced from secondary sources, and ocassionaly tertiary sources.
> > >
> > > Now compiling a repository of such orally transmitted histories and
> > > traditions would be an amazing idea for a new project in my opinion. My
> > > personal thought on this issue is keeping our current verifiability and
> > > notability requirements is a good idea. In some areas I think we
> include
> > > far too much (fan cruft anyone?).
> > >
> > > - Cameron C.
> > > Cameron11598
> > >
> > >  On Thu, 10 May 2018 21:34:15 -0700 peter.southw...@telkomsa.net
> > > wrote 
> > >
> > > If not written, how would they be referenced and verified?
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Je

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-12 Thread FRED BAUDER
; > > > > source then Wikipedia could use it as a source, without
> destroying
> > > the
> > > > > > credibility we have.
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Peter
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@
> lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > On
> > > > > > Behalf Of Gnangarra
> > > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:50
> > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > > >
> > > > > > notability and verifiability are important, every culture and
> > > > language
> > > > > > has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge. These culture
> > > > manage
> > > > > > successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the
> > western
> > > > > styles
> > > > > > were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives. The issue
> is
> > > how
> > > > > do
> > > > > > we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect
> > > them,
> > > > > > how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do
> > is
> > > > not
> > > > > > the only.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our
> > current
> > > > > > systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the
> citations
> > > > from
> > > > > > books published but no digital. Changing the way we consider and
> > > value
> > > > > > alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the
> > question
> > > > is
> > > > > do
> > > > > > we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the
> > sum
> > > of
> > > > > all
> > > > > > knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current
> > > knowledge
> > > > > > networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the
> > wikipedia
> > > > but
> > > > > > rather the creation of new project to bring forth these
> alternative
> > > > > > knowledge streams
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias
> where
> > a
> > > > > member
> > > > > > > of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity
> though:
> > > > > > > https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.
> > > > > > > 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are many things that can be addressed individually and
> as a
> > > > > > movement
> > > > > > > or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I
> > > > > > personally
> > > > > > > do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
> > > > > > impressions.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Cheers!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
> > > > > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> > > > > > > escribió:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to
> > > > produce
> > > > > > > > reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints
> > > opens
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to
> > remain
> > > > > open
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust
> > > alternatives.
> > > > > > Other
> > > > > > > > projects may work around this problem, but would then
> pr

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-12 Thread FRED BAUDER
gt; > we opened editing to anybody.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > JP
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 11:05 AM Peter Southwood <
> > > > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > One Jar'Edo Wens hoax is enough, and that lasted 10 years in
> > spite
> > > of
> > > > > > > notability and verifiability requirements, Without the
> > > verifiability
> > > > > > > requirement it would probably still be there. Leaps of faith
> are
> > > > > things
> > > > > > > that I do not generally do, I am a natural sceptic and prefer
> > > > evidence,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > where possible, reproducible results. When the evidence is
> > > > intangible,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > authors must take responsibility for their work, and that means
> > > track
> > > > > > > record and proof of identity.
> > > > > > > This would be more easily fitted into a new project. I do not
> see
> > > it
> > > > as
> > > > > > > possible in Wikipedia. If the new project became recognised as
> a
> > > > > reliable
> > > > > > > source then Wikipedia could use it as a source, without
> > destroying
> > > > the
> > > > > > > credibility we have.
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > Peter
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@
> > lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > > On
> > > > > > > Behalf Of Gnangarra
> > > > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:50
> > > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > notability and verifiability are important, every culture and
> > > > > language
> > > > > > > has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge. These
> culture
> > > > > manage
> > > > > > > successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the
> > > western
> > > > > > styles
> > > > > > > were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives. The issue
> > is
> > > > how
> > > > > > do
> > > > > > > we bring these sources into the western system, how do we
> respect
> > > > them,
> > > > > > > how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently
> do
> > > is
> > > > > not
> > > > > > > the only.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our
> > > current
> > > > > > > systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the
> > citations
> > > > > from
> > > > > > > books published but no digital. Changing the way we consider
> and
> > > > value
> > > > > > > alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the
> > > question
> > > > > is
> > > > > > do
> > > > > > > we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share
> the
> > > sum
> > > > of
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > > knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current
> > > > knowledge
> > > > > > > networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the
> > > wikipedia
> > > > > but
> > > > > > > rather the creation of new project to bring forth these
> > alternative
> > > > > > > knowledge streams
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I posted this a while ago, an investigati

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-12 Thread FRED BAUDER
n the citations
> > > from
> > > > > books published but no digital. Changing the way we consider and
> > value
> > > > > alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the
> question
> > > is
> > > > do
> > > > > we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the
> sum
> > of
> > > > all
> > > > > knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current
> > knowledge
> > > > > networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the
> wikipedia
> > > but
> > > > > rather the creation of new project to bring forth these alternative
> > > > > knowledge streams
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias where
> a
> > > > member
> > > > > > of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity though:
> > > > > > https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.
> > > > > > 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are many things that can be addressed individually and as a
> > > > > movement
> > > > > > or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I
> > > > > personally
> > > > > > do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
> > > > > impressions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
> > > > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> > > > > > escribió:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to
> > > produce
> > > > > > > reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints
> > opens
> > > > the
> > > > > > > doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to
> remain
> > > > open
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust
> > alternatives.
> > > > > Other
> > > > > > > projects may work around this problem, but would then probably
> > not
> > > be
> > > > > > open
> > > > > > > for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way?
> > > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > > Peter
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@
> > lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > > On
> > > > > > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01
> > > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > "Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the
> canon
> > of
> > > > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But it is what we accept as part of the canon of "knowledge" as
> > > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > > that could be improved. We have a very western approach to that
> > > > saying
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > it needs to be published in such books or journals to be
> notable
> > > > > enough,
> > > > > > > when different cultures use different ways to build their canon
> > of
> > > > > > > knowledge.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > JP
> > > > > > > User:Amqui
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:53 AM FRED BAUDER <
> > > fredb...@fairpoint.net>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-12 Thread FRED BAUDER
t; > personally
> > > > > do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
> > > > impressions.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers!
> > > > >
> > > > > El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
> > > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> > > > > escribió:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to
> > produce
> > > > > > reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints
> opens
> > > the
> > > > > > doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to remain
> > > open
> > > > to
> > > > > > anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust
> alternatives.
> > > > Other
> > > > > > projects may work around this problem, but would then probably
> not
> > be
> > > > > open
> > > > > > for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way?
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Peter
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@
> lists.wikimedia.org]
> > > On
> > > > > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01
> > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon
> of
> > > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > But it is what we accept as part of the canon of "knowledge" as
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > > that could be improved. We have a very western approach to that
> > > saying
> > > > > that
> > > > > > it needs to be published in such books or journals to be notable
> > > > enough,
> > > > > > when different cultures use different ways to build their canon
> of
> > > > > > knowledge.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > JP
> > > > > > User:Amqui
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:53 AM FRED BAUDER <
> > fredb...@fairpoint.net>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > - Original Message -
> > > > > > > From: Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > > > > > Sent: Thu, 10 May 2018 04:02:46 -0400 (EDT)
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ...because of our rules regarding references. Oddly,
> > > > > > > Wikipedia can at best only echo the systemic bias, but will
> never
> > > be
> > > > > able
> > > > > > > to correct it."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon
> > of
> > > > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The knowledge industry could do better. And when it does,
> > Wikipedia
> > > > > will
> > > > > > > reflect that. in the meantime it is helpful if gender and other
> > > bias
> > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > are noted and accommodated. Our mission is more modest than
> full
> > > > > > correction
> > > > > > > of all bias, but we can contribute or even lead.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fred
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ___
> > > > > > > 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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-11 Thread FRED BAUDER
rally do, I am a natural sceptic and prefer evidence,
>>> and
>>>> where possible, reproducible results. When the evidence is intangible,
>>> the
>>>> authors must take responsibility for their work, and that means track
>>>> record and proof of identity.
>>>> This would be more easily fitted into a new project. I do not see it as
>>>> possible in Wikipedia. If the new project became recognised as a
>> reliable
>>>> source then Wikipedia could use it as a source, without destroying the
>>>> credibility we have.
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Peter
>>>> 
>>>> -Original Message-
>>>> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
>>>> Behalf Of Gnangarra
>>>> Sent: 10 May 2018 15:50
>>>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
>>>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>>>> 
>>>> notability and verifiability are important,  every culture and
>> language
>>>> has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge.  These culture
>> manage
>>>> successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the western
>>> styles
>>>> were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives.  The issue is how
>>> do
>>>> we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect them,
>>>> how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do is
>> not
>>>> the only.
>>>> 
>>>> There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our current
>>>> systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the citations
>> from
>>>> books published but no digital.  Changing the way we consider and value
>>>> alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the question
>> is
>>> do
>>>> we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the sum of
>>> all
>>>> knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current knowledge
>>>> networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
>>>> 
>>>> Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the wikipedia
>> but
>>>> rather the creation of new project to bring forth these alternative
>>>> knowledge streams
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> 
>>>>> I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias where a
>>> member
>>>>> of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity though:
>>>>> https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.
>>>>> 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
>>>>> 
>>>>> There are many things that can be addressed individually and as a
>>>> movement
>>>>> or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I
>>>> personally
>>>>> do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
>>>> impressions.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Cheers!
>>>>> 
>>>>> El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
>>>>> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
>>>>> escribió:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to
>> produce
>>>>>> reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints opens
>>> the
>>>>>> doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to remain
>>> open
>>>> to
>>>>>> anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust alternatives.
>>>> Other
>>>>>> projects may work around this problem, but would then probably not
>> be
>>>>> open
>>>>>> for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way?
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Peter
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -Original Message-
>>>>>> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
>>> On
>>>>>> Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
>>>>>> Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01
>>>>>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-10 Thread FRED BAUDER
gt; Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > >
> > >  notability and verifiability are important,  every culture and
> language
> > > has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge.  These culture
> manage
> > > successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the western
> > styles
> > > were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives.  The issue is how
> > do
> > > we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect them,
> > > how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do is
> not
> > > the only.
> > >
> > > There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our current
> > > systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the citations
> from
> > > books published but no digital.  Changing the way we consider and value
> > > alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the question
> is
> > do
> > > we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the sum of
> > all
> > > knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current knowledge
> > > networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
> > >
> > > Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the wikipedia
> but
> > > rather the creation of new project to bring forth these alternative
> > > knowledge streams
> > >
> > >
> > > On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias where a
> > member
> > > > of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity though:
> > > > https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.
> > > > 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
> > > >
> > > > There are many things that can be addressed individually and as a
> > > movement
> > > > or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I
> > > personally
> > > > do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
> > > impressions.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cheers!
> > > >
> > > > El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
> > > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> > > > escribió:
> > > >
> > > > > Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to
> produce
> > > > > reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints opens
> > the
> > > > > doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to remain
> > open
> > > to
> > > > > anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust alternatives.
> > > Other
> > > > > projects may work around this problem, but would then probably not
> be
> > > > open
> > > > > for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way?
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Peter
> > > > >
> > > > > -Original Message-
> > > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> > On
> > > > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01
> > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > >
> > > > > "Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon of
> > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge."
> > > > >
> > > > > But it is what we accept as part of the canon of "knowledge" as
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > > that could be improved. We have a very western approach to that
> > saying
> > > > that
> > > > > it needs to be published in such books or journals to be notable
> > > enough,
> > > > > when different cultures use different ways to build their canon of
> > > > > knowledge.
> > > > >
> > > > > JP
> > > > > User:Amqui
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:53 AM FRED BAUDER <
> fredb...@fairpoint.net>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Original Message -
> > > > > > From: Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com>
> > > &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-10 Thread FRED BAUDER
Lucille B. Buchanan might make an article: 
http://www.blackpast.org/aaw/jones-lucy-lucile-berkeley-buchanan-1884-1989

Fred


___
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] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-10 Thread FRED BAUDER
t; has this issue when it comes to sharing knowledge.  These culture manage
> > successfully to share knowledge many of them long before the western
> styles
> > were developed, I'd say they are robust alternatives.  The issue is how
> do
> > we bring these sources into the western system, how do we respect them,
> > how do we teach ourselves to understand that what we currently do is not
> > the only.
> >
> > There are risks in potential abuses of every system, even our current
> > systems have their faults and we assume good faith in the citations from
> > books published but no digital.  Changing the way we consider and value
> > alternative knowledge streams will take a leap of faith, the question is
> do
> > we really want to take that leap, do we really want to share the sum of
> all
> > knowledge, do we want to address inherent bias in our current knowledge
> > networks or are we comfortable with just token efforts.
> >
> > Maybe the solution isnt in incorporating directly into the wikipedia but
> > rather the creation of new project to bring forth these alternative
> > knowledge streams
> >
> >
> > On 10 May 2018 at 21:47, Eduardo Testart <etest...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I posted this a while ago, an investigation on gender bias where a
> member
> > > of Wikimedia Chile was involved, in his personal capacity though:
> > > https://epjdatascience.springeropen.com/articles/10.
> > > 1140/epjds/s13688-016-0066-4
> > >
> > > There are many things that can be addressed individually and as a
> > movement
> > > or collective, if we believe the conclusions are valid, which I
> > personally
> > > do, since they are supported with data and not on our personal
> > impressions.
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > >
> > > El jue., may. 10, 2018 10:27, Peter Southwood <
> > > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> > > escribió:
> > >
> > > > Notability and verifiability are important. They allow us to produce
> > > > reasonably reliable work. Moving away from those constraints opens
> the
> > > > doors to extremely unreliable material. If Wikipedia is to remain
> open
> > to
> > > > anyone to edit, there do not appear to be any robust alternatives.
> > Other
> > > > projects may work around this problem, but would then probably not be
> > > open
> > > > for anyone to edit. Or can you suggest another way?
> > > > Cheers,
> > > > Peter
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> On
> > > > Behalf Of Jean-Philippe Béland
> > > > Sent: 10 May 2018 15:01
> > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > >
> > > > "Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon of
> > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally accepted knowledge."
> > > >
> > > > But it is what we accept as part of the canon of "knowledge" as
> > Wikipedia
> > > > that could be improved. We have a very western approach to that
> saying
> > > that
> > > > it needs to be published in such books or journals to be notable
> > enough,
> > > > when different cultures use different ways to build their canon of
> > > > knowledge.
> > > >
> > > > JP
> > > > User:Amqui
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 5:53 AM FRED BAUDER <fredb...@fairpoint.net>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > - Original Message -
> > > > > From: Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com>
> > > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > > > > Sent: Thu, 10 May 2018 04:02:46 -0400 (EDT)
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems
> > > > >
> > > > > ...because of our rules regarding references. Oddly,
> > > > > Wikipedia can at best only echo the systemic bias, but will never
> be
> > > able
> > > > > to correct it."
> > > > >
> > > > > Nothing odd, it's baked in: Wikipedia is a summary of the canon of
> > > > > knowledge, the corpus of generally acc

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-07 Thread FRED BAUDER
Women editors might have something to add about nursing and the history of 
nursing that adds gender-specific value, increasing our coverage of the 
subject. So a workshop at a nursing convention might be valuable.

Fred

- Original Message -
From: Amir E. Aharoni 
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Sent: Mon, 07 May 2018 04:52:31 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-07 9:55 GMT+03:00 Jane Darnell :

> Amir,
> It's funny - after reading your mail I wondered if I had read Romaine's
> mail correctly.


You had probably read it correctly.

Generally, I'm wondering whether direct invitations to women or people of
color (or women of color, etc.) work as they should. Many people say that
they work. They may be right, at least in part. If I understand correctly,
Romaine says that he has doubts about it, and he's probably right, too, at
least for some people.

I'm just trying to say that diversity is important. How do we reach it? I
don't have very good answers. Probably not "one size fits all".

I mean, I want that woman about whom Romaine was speaking to contribute her
knowledge. I want everybody to contribute their knowledge. Unless I missed
it, Romaine didn't write what is her expertise, but just for the sake of
the example, let's make something up and say that it's Astronomy.

Do I want her to contribute her knowledge about Astronomy? Of course I do.
Should I tell her that I hope that she contributes her knowledge about
Astronomy? I probably should. (Do correct me if I'm wrong.)

Do I think that she has something to say about Astronomy that men don't?
Yes, it's quite possible. Should I tell her that? Hmm, I don't know. Maybe,
maybe not. I think that this is the question that Romaine is trying to
raise. And again, please correct me if I'm wrong.
___
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] Gendergap approach causing problems

2018-05-07 Thread FRED BAUDER
Women and other unrepresented people are invited to edit, to become skilled in 
editing (lots of practice and experience needed), and get well-deserved credit 
for excellence, but it is a process. Everyone stumbles at first, the point is 
not run anyone off or blame the difficulties associated with getting up to 
speed on gender or whatever.

Fred Bauder

- Original Message -
From: Romaine Wiki <romaine.w...@gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Cc: Wikimedia Gendergap mailing list <gender...@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Mon, 07 May 2018 00:10:25 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Gendergap approach causing problems

Hi all,

On Wikipedia and in our movement we are aware of the gendergap that exists
and all kinds of activities are organised to make the gap smaller. I think
this is great as no single gap should exist in collecting all the knowledge
in the world, as well as our movement should be diverse as the world's
population is diverse.

The statistics are clear on this matter, this is something to take care of.
However, a part of the approach is causing problems, because general
statistics should not be applied on individuals as that reduces humans to
numbers only.

The reason why I bring this up is because I recently received an e-mail
from a user in the Wikimedia movement who has (temporarily?) stopped
contributing as she is not happy with a specific aspect of the atmosphere
in Wikimedia.

She does not speak out at loud, but I think we must be aware as movement of
the silent cry, therefore this e-mail to bring awareness (but with respect
for the privacy of this individual).


What has happened?

She was invited to participate in a Wikimedia activity, because:
1. she is a woman
2. she is from a minority
3. she is from an area in the world with much less editors (compared to
Europe/US)

and perhaps also because her colour of her skin is a bit different then
mine (Caucasian).

At the same time she has the impression that the work she does on the
Wikimedia wiki('s) is not valued, nor taken into account.

She does not want to be invited because she is a woman, nor because she is
from a minority, nor ... etc. This is offensive.
She only wants to be invited because of the work she contributes on
Wikipedia/etc.



Besides the many good initiatives and intentions, this kind of approaches
to our contributors is demotivating them, please be aware of this. I
believe demotivation/frustration is the largest problem we face as movement.


I heard from people that the problem described is called tokenism
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokenism>.


I believe the only way to close the gaps related to gender, minorities,
etc, is to create an atmosphere in what everyone is appreciated for what
she/he is doing, completely unrelated to the gender someone appears to
have, the ethnicity, race, area of the world, etc etc etc etc.

Thank you!

Romaine
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Defamation of Wikipedia in a Telugu (te) Motion Picture

2017-09-26 Thread FRED BAUDER
We should sue Billy the Kid while we are at it. And Hitler... Imagine the 
bragging he does down in Hell.

Fred

- Original Message -
From: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga 
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Sun, 17 Sep 2017 11:45:36 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Defamation of Wikipedia in a Telugu (te) Motion  Picture

Greetings,

Introducing myself, I am Krishna Chaitanya Velaga from Andhra Pradesh,
India. My user name is "Krishna Chaitanya Velaga", I've been actively
contributing to en Wikipedia and Commons since December 2014. I also form
the Executive Committee of Wikimedia Chapter (India). My mother tongue is
Telugu (te).

A Telugu movie titled Paisa Vasool
 was released on 1
September 2017. In the movie, male lead boasts himself by referring to
Wikipedia. His statement in the movie is as follows: *"36 brawls, 24
murders, 36 stabbings, This is visible record in Wikipedia" *(The same may
be observed from the trailer of the movie, between 0:22 to 0:32 at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVUZ-jG_i3c). As far I am concerned I feel
this as serious defamation of the brand, the community and the work we do.
It really degrades the reality and the efforts we put to produce
encyclopedic content to the readers.

In this context, I request the community to take interest in their to voice
their opinions, and also discuss any legal action to be enforced.


Regards,

[image: photo]
*Krishna Chaitanya Velaga*
Member | Executive Committee

Wikimedia Chapter (India) 
+91 94948 65420 | kcvelaga.blogspot.in
___
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] Naive questions: what could do the movement with 1B dollars/euros?

2017-05-17 Thread FRED BAUDER
I think we could hire professional fact checkers and target articles 
that have gotten off track. I don't think a great deal of money would 
be necessary to set an example, and illustrate some of our notorious 
problems. In general more money, however, draws flies even better than 
shit.


Fred Bauder

On Wed, 17 May 2017 18:08:08 +0100
 David Cuenca Tudela <dacu...@gmail.com> wrote:
Are there any activities that could have a meaningful impact if we 
ask

donors for such amount of seed money? Are there reasons to do so?

Do we have the guts to do so?

Do we have the organizational capital to handle it? Or can we get 
there

soon?

Do we have the moral right to take a lead in the world and ask for 
as much

resources as needed?

Is our leader and our members willing to take big undertakings?

Are most of us ready to live in fear while the values that we cherry 
most

would crumble under our own eyes?

Would it matter much if we as a movement would disappear? Or is it a
struggle always a positive answer against the shadows in the world?

Can we offer anything else in this world than truth, free knowledge, 
and an

open inclusive environment?

Would you take best wishes from a stranger like me?


Micru
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

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

2017-04-15 Thread FRED BAUDER
"The Whopper, also known as America’s favorite burger, " is a problem 
as it implies that the Whopper is the favorite burger of the American 
public. Perhaps it is, but that is a trademark, not the result of a 
survey. The other stuff, "a flame-[[grilling|grilled]] patty made with 
100% beef with no preservatives, no fillers and is topped with daily 
sliced tomatoes and onions, fresh lettuce, pickles, ketchup and mayo, 
served on a soft sesame seed bun." happens to be factually true and 
cannot be said of the products of, say, McDonalds where the "fixings" 
arrive in delivery trucks.


Fred Bauder

On Sat, 15 Apr 2017 08:06:50 +0200
 "Peter Southwood" <peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
James, 
Which parts of those statements to you consider factually 
inaccurate, and which parts do you consider misleading in some other 
way?
Cheers, 
Peter


-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On 
Behalf Of James Heilman

Sent: Friday, April 14, 2017 5:32 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing 
companies that offer paid editing services


Wikipedia is not for sale. We are not simply another advertising 
venue available to the corporations of the world. We have mechanisms 
for corporations to suggest changes to our content and it is called 
the talk page.


Lets look at the changes likely made by Burger King staff in more 
detail:


In this edit this sentence "The Whopper is a burger, consisting of a 
flame-grilled patty made with 100% beef with no preservatives, no 
fillers and is topped with daily sliced tomatoes and onions, fresh 
lettuce, pickles, ketchup and mayo, served on a soft sesame seed 
bun."

<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Whopper=revision=773836335=773833110>
was
added not once but twice. And than was added again following its 
first removal.


In this edit this sentence "The Whopper, also known as America’s 
favorite burger, has a flame-[[grilling|grilled]] patty made with 
100% beef with no preservatives, no fillers and is topped with daily 
sliced tomatoes and onions, fresh lettuce, pickles, ketchup and mayo, 
served on a soft sesame seed bun. Whopper and America’s Favorite 
Burger are trademarks of Burger King Corporation.

<https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Whopper=773807497=773585358>"
was added.

One of the accounts did not disclosed their relationship to the 
company in question. And yes this is spam, so they did spam 
Wikipedia. See [[WP:PEACOCK]] 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Puffery>
and [[WP:NPOV]] 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Five_pillars>, the latter of 
which is pillar number 2.



This is not the first time the marketing department at a multi 
billion dollar company has tried to adjust our content for the 
company's / shareholder's gains. A few years back a couple of the 
heads of marketing at Medtronic 
<https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/08/wikipedia-editors-for-pay/393926/>,
along with a number of physicians one of whom they had paid more 
than a quarter of a million dollars, tried to remove the best 
available evidence regarding vertebroplasty, a procedure which 
medicare spent at the time more than a billion dollars a year on. 
Half a dozen paid editors working together can easily get a majority 
in many of our decision making processes.


Our readers deserve a Wikipedia which is written independently of 
the subject mater in question. Our readers have been harmed by 
undisclosed paid editing in the past. These are individuals typically 
less savvy and less wealthy than the executives at a large 
corporation. I am sorry but our readers are the ones that deserve our 
attention and our protection. We already have the Wifione case 
<http://www.newsweek.com/2015/04/03/manipulating-wikipedia-promote-bogus-business-school-316133.html>
were Wikipedia was used to promote an unethical Indian university 
and therefore we played a role in misleading the students who 
applied. We must do better.


James

On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 5:23 AM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> 
wrote:


but they didnt spam, nor did they introduce any false hoods, or 
remove 
controversial content, they just put a description of the Whopper 
for 
the opening sentence.  As Andy said rather than biting and creating 
arguments amongst ourselves would it not be better to have used the 
opportunity to benefit the community in a positive way.


On 14 April 2017 at 18:44, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 14 April 2017 at 11:38, Andy Mabbett 
<a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>

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.

>
>
&g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF advanced permissions for employees

2017-02-18 Thread FRED BAUDER
Volunteers who have access to advanced tools are required to identify 
themselves.


The problem with volunteers dealing with extremely sensitive matters 
is that they have to answer to a committee. When the committee starts 
demanding pre-approval it becomes impossible for a volunteer to 
function because the procedure is too cumbersome and punishing. Which 
is why certain matters have gradually shifted to staff who can make 
quick decisions and have clear authority to do so. Some things are 
done by, or at the direction of, the legal department, for example.


Fred Bauder

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 21:02:13 -0800
 Adrian Raddatz <ajradd...@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't lack faith in the community, I just recognize that not 
everything
needs to be dealt with by us. Building an encyclopedia and dealing 
with
these sensitive cases are very different things, and community 
volunteers

lack both the resources and the responsibility to deal with them.
Volunteers with the most advanced permissions on the site only need 
to sign
an agreement - the WMF doesn't know who they are, and there is no 
way to
hold them accountable for properly using the information they have 
access
to beyond removing their access. Staff, on the other hand, are known 
and
can have legal action taken against them beyond their termination in 
cases

of abuse. Simple as that.

Adrian Raddatz

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 8:15 PM, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:


AJ,

> "Just because volunteers are competent enough to deal with 
something

doesn't
> mean that they should be."

Can you clarify that, please?

> "Again, the difference here is between these
> sensitive cases being handled by trained, experienced, legally
accountable
> professionals, or by volunteers who are part-time at best."

I am puzzled by your lack of faith in the quality of work of our 
peers

in the community. Why be so negative? We have produced Wikipedia;
surely that is evidence that volunteers can be highly capable.

Certainly not all volunteers are, of course, and some of them end up
banned for good reason. But in general, I think there is good
reason to have faith in our peers.

I'm not sure how volunteers are not "legally accountable"; perhaps 
you

could clarify that point.

> How much time are you expecting the community-vetted volunteers to 
put in

> here? Do we not already have our own responsibilities?

I agree with you that a good use of WMF funds is to pay staff to 
work on

investigations and enforcement. This can be done in such a way that
there is always some kind of community element in a decision-maker 
role

regarding whether to ban a member of the community.

In addition to staff resources, I would like to see WMF put more 
effort

into
expanding the population of the volunteer community, particularly 
long-term

volunteers who gain sufficient knowledge and experience to serve in
higher-skill roles such as CU/OS, technical development, outreach to
GLAM+STEM organizations, and mentorship of new Wikimedians.

> You say that the current
> system is broken, because... why?

I say that the current system is inappropriate (not broken) because
WMF should not be making decisions about who is banned from the 
community.
The purpose of WMF is to serve and nurture the community, not to 
rule it.


> The community doesn't deal with it?
> That's a good thing. The community shouldn't need to deal with 
this

stuff.
> It's a blessing, not a curse.

I agree that having staff involved in investigations and enforcement 
is a

good thing.
But as I said, I find it inappropriate and unwise for WMF to (1) 
have a

largely opaque
process for making these decisions and (2) exclude the community 
from

the decision-making process.

> It might be worth explaining some more of the
> bans process publicly, perhaps on a wiki page, to alleviate fears 
that

it's
> just being used to get rid of people that the Foundation doesn't 
like.


I agree with you.

I think that global bans are reasonable options in some cases. In 
terms of
quantity, I would like to see more of them and to see bans initiated 
more
quickly, such as against undisclosed COI editors who violate the 
terms of

service.
I would also like to see better technical tools for enforcing bans. 
But I

want the
community, in some fashion (probably through some kind of committee, 
as
has been suggested elsewhere in this thread) to make the decision 
about

whether to impose a global ban, in consultation with WMF.

Pine
___
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,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

2017-02-05 Thread FRED BAUDER

A blanket ban sweeps in possible contributors and potential employees.

A well-crafted policy, properly administered, generally, would not.

Fred Bauder

On Sun, 5 Feb 2017 04:15:33 -0500
 Yair Rand <yyairr...@gmail.com> wrote:
When and how the Wikimedia Foundation should associate itself 
publicly on

policy and political issues is not a new topic, and (as I have quite
recently discovered) official guidelines have been around for nearly 
five
years now. The Guidelines on Foundation Policy and Political 
Association
[1], established by WMF Legal for internal use, specifically bring 
up the
issue of "public endorsement or critique" of political policies, 
listing
several requirements for doing so, and further requiring that they 
"should
protect and advance Wikimedia’s mission “to empower and engage 
people
around the world to collect and develop educational content under a 
free
license or in the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively 
and

globally.” Accordingly, we will not support causes unrelated to or
inconsistent with that mission." The document goes on to list 
several

examples such as anti-war activism and animal rights.

I think this is an excellent and necessary policy.

The recent blog post says "We strongly urge the U.S. administration 
to

withdraw the recent executive order ... closing the doors to many
refugees." I have yet to hear any arguments regarding how that 
statement

specifically protects and advances our mission.

I have, on the other hand, heard on this list many arguments by 
people
explaining reasons why they feel very strongly that actions must be 
taken
against a certain country's administration, about how they expect 
that many
expected policies on general issues will cause harm in areas that 
they

value. Areas that are not directly related to our mission.

I can imagine that some may feel that certain areas of immigration 
and
travel policy may be so closely associated to Wikimedia's 
functioning that
action on that front must be taken. I would expect such an issue to 
be
discussed independently of the personal political wishes of those 
arguing.
If decisions are made on the basis that the only relevant issue is 
whether

any action would further Wikimedia's goals, I would trust that such
decisions were sufficiently reasonable.

However, if that is not the basis used, and some in the community 
and WMF
are willing to have their own independent individual values and 
goals
override those of the movement, to harm Wikimedia goals to support 
their
own political goals... I would find it very difficult to support 
such a
decision. I don't mean to speak too harshly, but the united goals 
and

vision of the movement are the _only_ thing that holds this diverse
community together, the only means by which Wikimedia exists, and if
outside aims can take priority, we would likely find that many would 
not
appreciate some using Wikimedia as yet another bullet in someone's 
arsenal

to be sacrificed in a political crusade, to say the least.

"Wikipedia is something special. It is like a library or a public 
park. It
is like a temple for the mind. It is a place we can all go to think, 
to

learn, to share our knowledge with others."

Please let us keep it that way.

[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal/Foundation_Policy_
and_Political_Association_Guideline
___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

2017-02-04 Thread FRED BAUDER

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:35:30 +0100
 Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
Well, there were speakers who were not able to attend Wikimanias in 
Haifa
and Cairo, to start with, because of similar bans, and the general 
response
then was "Whatever place we choose, someone is always 
discriminated". I am
not sure whether this is a healthy attitude or not, but I do not see 
why
the US travel ban leads to a statement whereas existing bans say in 
Arab

world, or Armenia-Azerbaijan or whatever do not.

Cheers
Yaroslav


The US ban is fragile, poorly supported in law; the others are 
entrenched and what we do is not likely to influence them.


Fred


___
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] don't run away from the mess we've made, fix it (Re: Concerns in general)

2017-01-27 Thread FRED BAUDER
Whatever the earliest editors did has long been superseded by liberal 
bias. (It was nearly impossible to insert even neutral information 
about Hillary Clinton into her article) It is important to stay in the 
US unless you wish to experience what lack of an enforced 
constitutional guarantee of free speech means in practice.


Fred Bauder




___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Can Wikipedia save the internet?": Wikipedia and political neutrality

2016-11-02 Thread FRED BAUDER

Craig,

That was what I was thinking. After the election, when there is little 
reason to have a article in that shape, would be a good time to 
extensively review it.


Fred

On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 12:59:09 -0400
 Craig Newmark <craig.newm...@gmail.com> wrote:

Fred, thanks!

Worth reviewing, after people have recovered from the election. How
about...reminding me two weeks from today. I might've recovered by 
then,

seriously...

Thanks!

Craig Newmark

founder, craigslist

On Nov 2, 2016 12:44 PM, "FRED BAUDER" <fredb...@fairpoint.net> 
wrote:



Craig,

I don't expect you to do anything about it, but Hillary Clinton
presidential campaign, 2016 has been so much an object of political 
editing
by Clinton supporters that it looks more like an ad for Hillary than 
a

Wikipedia article.

Fred Bauder

On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 11:43:32 -0400
 Craig Newmark <craig.newm...@craigconnects.org> wrote:


Wikipedia is where facts go to live.


It helps that folks on US Capitol Hill are receptive to quiet 
suggestions

that Wikipedia avoid becoming a partisan battleground.

Craig Newmark

founder, craigslist

On Nov 1, 2016 7:35 PM, "Olatunde Isaac" <reachout2is...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Hoi,


Pine, thanks for sharing this article. I found the entire article 
very

interesting. I am glad that Wikipedia is not seen as a vehicle for
political campaign. Sometimes, people create account on Wikipedia 
with

the
aim to use the encyclopedia for political campaign and a good number 
of
them end up getting blocked either for POV pushing or other 
disruptive

editing/behavior.

BTWI have a few question. Is it a good idea to protect a page 
from

creation if there are indications that the overall intention of the
creator
is to use Wikipedia as a platform for political campaign? If yes, 
how is

such protection necessary if the page is neutrally written?

There was an incident that happened sometimes last year when an 
article

on
"Akinwunmi Ambode"  was protected from creation and unprotected 
after his

election.

Is this really a good idea?

Best,

Isaac
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.

-Original Message-
From: Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>
Sender: "Wikimedia-l" <wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org>Date:
Wed,
26 Oct 2016 20:31:59
To: Wikimedia Mailing List<Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>; 
Wikimedia

Education<educat...@lists.wikimedia.org>; Wiki
Research-l<wiki-research-l@
lists.wikimedia.org>
Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] "Can Wikipedia save the internet?": Wikipedia 
and

political neutrality

Hello colleagues,

Some of you might be interested in this news article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/
can-wikipedia-save-the-internet-a7380786.html

When we know that we have countless shortcomings in Wikimedia, I 
found it
refreshing to hear that some aspects of our content and community 
are

performing well and, on the whole, are serving the public interest.

Regards,

Pine
___
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,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik

i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>








___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Can Wikipedia save the internet?": Wikipedia and political neutrality

2016-11-02 Thread FRED BAUDER

Craig,

I don't expect you to do anything about it, but Hillary Clinton 
presidential campaign, 2016 has been so much an object of political 
editing by Clinton supporters that it looks more like an ad for 
Hillary than a Wikipedia article.


Fred Bauder

On Wed, 2 Nov 2016 11:43:32 -0400
 Craig Newmark <craig.newm...@craigconnects.org> wrote:

Wikipedia is where facts go to live.


It helps that folks on US Capitol Hill are receptive to quiet 
suggestions

that Wikipedia avoid becoming a partisan battleground.

Craig Newmark

founder, craigslist

On Nov 1, 2016 7:35 PM, "Olatunde Isaac" <reachout2is...@gmail.com> 
wrote:



Hoi,

Pine, thanks for sharing this article. I found the entire article 
very

interesting. I am glad that Wikipedia is not seen as a vehicle for
political campaign. Sometimes, people create account on Wikipedia 
with the
aim to use the encyclopedia for political campaign and a good number 
of
them end up getting blocked either for POV pushing or other 
disruptive

editing/behavior.

BTWI have a few question. Is it a good idea to protect a page 
from
creation if there are indications that the overall intention of the 
creator
is to use Wikipedia as a platform for political campaign? If yes, 
how is

such protection necessary if the page is neutrally written?

There was an incident that happened sometimes last year when an 
article on
"Akinwunmi Ambode"  was protected from creation and unprotected 
after his

election.

Is this really a good idea?

Best,

Isaac
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless handheld from Glo Mobile.

-Original Message-
From: Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>
Sender: "Wikimedia-l" <wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org>Date: 
Wed,

26 Oct 2016 20:31:59
To: Wikimedia Mailing List<Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>; 
Wikimedia
Education<educat...@lists.wikimedia.org>; Wiki 
Research-l<wiki-research-l@

lists.wikimedia.org>
Reply-To: Wikimedia Mailing List <wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] "Can Wikipedia save the internet?": Wikipedia 
and

political neutrality

Hello colleagues,

Some of you might be interested in this news article:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/
can-wikipedia-save-the-internet-a7380786.html

When we know that we have countless shortcomings in Wikimedia, I 
found it
refreshing to hear that some aspects of our content and community 
are

performing well and, on the whole, are serving the public interest.

Regards,

Pine
___
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,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
___
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,

<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why are articles being deleted?

2016-06-26 Thread FRED BAUDER

On Sun, 26 Jun 2016 15:04:54 +0100
 Lilburne <lilbu...@tygers-of-wrath.net> wrote:

On 25/06/2016 06:49, Mitar wrote:

Hi!

I am an occasional editor of Wikipedia, I read it a lot, I edit
sometimes, and I am at all not familiar with bureaucracies and rules
Wikipedia community has developed through years (call me lazy, but
they simply always look too scary and too many for me to even start
reading them, walls and walls of text). When I interact with 
Wikipedia

I thus try to assume what reasonable rules for creating a
collaborative source of all human knowledge would be.



That is one of the meanings of "Ignore all rules:" Assume the rules 
are reasonable and edit.


Fred Bauder


___
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, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Harvard Law Library Readies Trove of Decisions for Digital Age"

2015-10-29 Thread FRED BAUDER
The Harvard data base will be available to anyone after 8 years, and 
"Under the agreement with Harvard, the entire underlying database, not 
just limited search results, will be shared with nonprofit 
organizations and scholars that wish to develop specialized 
applications." That's us, if we can use it.


Fred Bauder

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 06:24:01 -0400
 "FRED BAUDER" <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote:
I have started the article Ravel Law on en. Basic access is free to 
the public; however, we could ask for "professional" access which is 
offered free to "law students and legal academics"


Fred Bauder

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 00:48:51 -0700
 Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

Good news for open access:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/29/us/harvard-law-library-sacrifices-a-trove-for-the-sake-of-a-free-database.html?_r=0

I hope that Wikimedians will get access to the collection via TWL. 
(:


Pine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Building a we in the wikimedia movement

2015-05-23 Thread FRED BAUDER

Video is not necessary.

Fred

On Sat, 23 May 2015 09:42:34 -0700
 David Cuenca Tudela dacu...@gmail.com wrote:

I third that!

However we are entering the field of privacy, because as useful the 
virtual
meetings can be, they might be intrusive if you are in your home and 
you
show your whole house to the world. As long as people are happy 
about that,
then I do not see any problem in increasing the number of meetings 
having a

virtual component in Wikimania.

I wonder if it is possible to organize a virtual conference first 
using
something like Google Hangouts to test if it would work at a bigger 
scale

like wikimania.

On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 9:29 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:


How?

Default to open meetings, not closed or invitation only.

Default to open wikis and lists, not closed.

Virtual attendance at meetings and conferences. Wikimania has always 
been
an opportunity to showcase virtual meetings, and encourage those of 
us
unable to fly (or not rich enough to pay) to feel part of the 
exclusive

we.

Fae
On 23 May 2015 17:19, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk 
wrote:


 On 23 May 2015 at 17:08, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

  I like the idea of fostering more and friendlier connections 
among

  community member

 So do I.

 However, the coreallry to this is the firamtion of cliques, which 
can

 be equally unwlecoming to new editors and can entrench systemic
 biases. We see this, and ownership, in some en.WP wikiprjcts, 
for

 example.

 How can we itigate against this, while making our projects more 
social?


 --
 Andy Mabbett
 @pigsonthewing
 http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

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

mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe





--
Etiamsi omnes, ego non
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia community health: strategic opportunities and threats

2015-04-18 Thread FRED BAUDER

On Sat, 18 Apr 2015 11:27:09 -0700
 Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

Hi all,

Since WMF is doing a strategy update (with which I'm not involved, 
but hope
that the community can influence), I'm wondering what others 
thoughts are
on Wikipedia's strategic opportunities and threats. 


What do others think about how Wikipedia's community health can 
transform

from threatened to thriving?

Pine


Here's a down home truth: People ARE entitled to their own facts, 
including those people who prefer our version. Self-conconsious 
recognition of this truth may be helpful in understanding and 
planning. We need to be aware of the complexes which have a need to 
maintain a version of reality which differs from that Wikipedia, by 
operation of its policies, produces. Such a viewpoint takes the 
surprise out of such things making them more an exercise in diplomacy 
than of moral outrage. In terms of knowledge diplomacy we occupy the 
role played by Switzerland in political diplomacy, weak but protected.


Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 14:53:47 +0530
 Srikanth Ramakrishnan srik.r...@wikimedia.in wrote:

On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog.
Need I say anything else?


I think you've hit the nail on the head. It should not be easier to 
dominate a player-killing MUD than to edit an article on Wikipedia. In 
other words, one should not need to adopt the persona of a snarling 
dog to successfully edit.


Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
Thank you for this thoughtful response. In the United States, at 
least, girls routinely test higher than boys on verbal skills and have 
recently surpassed young men in attaining higher education in nearly 
all fields. There is a lot of dead time in the lives of many women. 
They are all over Facebook. Routine child care and housework give 
ample opportunity to research and edit as do many jobs. Objective 
factors which might limit editing are minimal.


Fred

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:47:22 +0100
 Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:

I think that the realistic point of view should be another.

There is a potential number of people who can be contributors 
(contributors

and not readers) but this potential number must be *realistic*.

Anyway these persons should have something to contribute to 
wikimedia

projects an basically:

a) ability to write (so a sufficient capacity to be active users 
and not

passive, it means a valid education and knowledge)
b) connection to the network (in order to have a continuous 
contribution to

the projects)
c) time to spent (volunteers must have time... a woman with children
probably will dedicate her free time to the family)

So there is a digital divide and a gender gap and so on but probably 
the

barriers cannot be solved within Wikimedia.

For this reason I don't think that half the humans could 
contribute.
There are barriers (education, digital divide, freetime, etc.) that 
can

only be partially solved by Wikimedia.

Please don't do the same simpler association number of speakers =
potential number of contributors because that strategy will be 
*surely*

wrong.

Regards


On Thu, Jan 8, 2015 at 9:56 AM, FRED BAUDER fredb...@fairpoint.net 
wrote:





That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so 
long

as it's relevant and factual.



That's the point; it would not matter if women contributed so long 
as it's

relevant and factual. Half the humans that could contribute are not.
Actually many more than half, as there are barriers other than 
gender.


Fred




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

mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe





--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Wikipedia: Ilario https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario
Skype: valdelli
Facebook: Ilario Valdelli https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli
Twitter: Ilario Valdelli https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli
Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli 
http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469

Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:25:23 +0100
 Ilario Valdelli valde...@gmail.com wrote:

I partially disagree with this vision.

Without the North American and European men there would not be any
opportunity to say: we would share the sum of the human knowledge.

Probably Wikimedia would not exist.


True, but our goal was to make knowledge and the opportunity to 
contribute to making knowledge available to everyone.


Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 11:29:57 +0100
 Liam Wyatt liamwy...@gmail.com wrote:

As this thread demonstrates, what discussions about the massive
gender imbalance in Wikimedia editorship need is more men discussing 
why it

might or might not be important.

/sarcasm


Radical feminist notions that men should reduce editing or 
participation are counter-productive. The solution is OR not NOT; 
anyone should be able to edit without struggle.


Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
 
That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so 
long as it's relevant and factual.


That's the point; it would not matter if women contributed so long as 
it's relevant and factual. Half the humans that could contribute are 
not. Actually many more than half, as there are barriers other than 
gender.


Fred



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER

I am optimistic that some great proposals might surface.

Fred

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 18:30:08 +0200
 Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote:
If you take it entirely at face value, I find it quite inoffensive. 
As I have no experience with reviewing grant proposals, I can't 
comment on its accuracy, but I am quite happy to take Fred's word for 
it.

Offence is often available if you search for it hard enough.
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org 
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Fæ

Sent: 08 January 2015 06:17 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month 
gender gap project-related decision


On 8 Jan 2015 16:11, FRED BAUDER fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
...
 I've noticed that women are often quite motivated and good at 
writing

grant proposals.

Extending good faith I would presume this is irony. It does not 
transmit well by email. Please keep in mind how offensive this sort 
of thing appears.


Fae
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2015.0.5577 / Virus Database: 4257/8890 - Release Date: 
01/08/15



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month gender gap project-related decision

2015-01-08 Thread FRED BAUDER
It's a rhetorical question, but, based on experience, I would probably 
chime in if a similar proposal was floated about native people such as 
African tribes or American Indians; most hardly ever edit, even in 
their own language, and throwing money at the problem is unlikely to 
be productive. It may be that a few clever effective proposals about 
gender participation might surface. I've noticed that women are often 
quite motivated and good at writing grant proposals.


Fred

On Thu, 8 Jan 2015 17:43:40 +0200
 Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net wrote:

How is it possible to give a realistic answer to that question?
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org 
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Risker

Sent: 08 January 2015 02:42 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why WMF should reconsider the 3-month 
gender gap project-related decision


I have one simple question:  if the Grants program was to focus on 
some other  key area rather than the gender gap, would we be having 
this discussion about how horrible it is to waste time this way? 
Would we see throwing up of hands in this way if the focus was, say, 
requests from the Global South? A focus on getting great bots built 
and working across wikis?  A focus on events and processes for media 
collection? (Incidentally the latter more or less happens anyway with 
several groups applying for funding for WLM within a narrow 
period...)



Frankly, there's not a single thing I've read, or a single objection 
I've seen raised, that wasn't about how unnecessary it is to focus on 
women.  I don't think we've ever heard that about the global south, 
or non-European languages, or a lot of other areas where there are 
acknowledged biases.


Risker/Anne




On 8 January 2015 at 02:07, mcc99 mc...@hotmail.com wrote:


Dear fellow Wikipedia devotees,

While I'm new to this list, I've been an avid fan and proponent of 
Wikipedia and all the great service it gives people since it 
launched.
People can learn not just all the basics of nearly any topic 
imaginable, but for a large number, readers can with diligence 
become 
expert on more than a few and save themselves the cost of 
tuition/training.  All this, in addition to satisfying their 
curiosity about millions of subjects.


That said, it doesn't matter who writes the content on Wikipedia so 
long as it's relevant and factual.  Unlike the published, 
single-authority edited encyclopediae of the past, Wikipedia allows 
anyone with relevant information to contribute to it.  Their 
additions 
or other edits are checked by volunteers to make sure the edit isn't 
a 
defacement, irrelevant, patently unfactual, or unverifiable.  They 
are 
typically left as written or maybe edited only for grammar/spelling. 

Wikipedia is a rare success story in democracy of knowledge.  If one 
feels moved to contribute, they do.  If not, they don't.  It's like 
voting in a sense, though it's true people in democracies should 
perhaps take the opportunity to do so more often.  But it's up to 
them.


Like voting or anything else, to single out a particular group of 
people based on their indelible characteristics as being desirable 
as 
contributors to any field implicitly devalues the contributions not 
just of those currently contributing who don't fall into that 
category, but also says to any other group of a particular identity 
that you care more about the group you're trying to get more 
involvement from than them.  Identity politics
is unfortunately a fact of our current political climate and I hope 
one day we can, as MLK Jr. hoped, judge one another not by skin 
color 
(and I'd add gender, sexuality, and a few others), but by content of 
character.  In the context of Wikipedia, this would translate to the 
veracity and applicability of contributions made to the vast 
Wikipedia 
knowledge-base -- not who in particular is doing the contributing, 
nor 
their indelible characteristics of person.


Because identity politics is today part of general electoral 
politics 
doesn't mean it need be for anything else, and especially given how 
such things as a person's ethnicity, gender, sexuality, etc., say 
nothing about what they know about or can do, I don't see how it's 
relevant to the veracity and applicability of Wikipedia's knowledge 
base.  I don't care that, for example, a black person (Charles Drew, 
MD) came up with the process of creating blood plasma, an innovation 
that has saved millions of lives.  He was tragically and mortally 
injured in a car accident, however, and so his potential future 
achievements were lost to humanity.  (He was not refused treatment 
for 
his injuries at the hospital he was taken to because of his 
ethnicity, 
as is widely but falsely believed; he was just so badly injured that 
he died.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_R._Drew#Death ). 
I 
also don't care that Adm Grace Hopper (USN) 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Effective censorship of Wikipedia by Google

2014-08-05 Thread Fred Bauder
I would prefer decency as a core value.

Fred

 On 05/08/2014, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
 ...
 We have a reply:
 https://twitter.com/JulietteGarside/status/496644233580003328

 @jayvdb @guardian @Wikipedia @wikisignpost We won't know unless
 Wikipedia chooses to make that information public

 Unless I'm missing something, this means that WMF senior management
 can tell us exactly which Wikipedia articles are suppressed after
 RTV requests to Google.

 What do we (the unpaid volunteer community) want to do with this
 information? Ethically this is difficult territory, but openness is
 one of our core values, so this should not all be stitched up in
 back-rooms without explaining what is going on to the whole community
 and aiming for a consensus on action.

 Fae
 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Effective censorship of Wikipedia by Google

2014-08-05 Thread Fred Bauder
I would prefer decency as a core value.

Fred

 On 05/08/2014, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
 ...
 We have a reply:
 https://twitter.com/JulietteGarside/status/496644233580003328

 @jayvdb @guardian @Wikipedia @wikisignpost We won't know unless
 Wikipedia chooses to make that information public

 Unless I'm missing something, this means that WMF senior management
 can tell us exactly which Wikipedia articles are suppressed after
 RTV requests to Google.

 What do we (the unpaid volunteer community) want to do with this
 information? Ethically this is difficult territory, but openness is
 one of our core values, so this should not all be stitched up in
 back-rooms without explaining what is going on to the whole community
 and aiming for a consensus on action.

 Fae
 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Effective censorship of Wikipedia by Google

2014-08-04 Thread Fred Bauder
 On 4 August 2014 10:49, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
 Possibly, if/when the Foundation finds out, it should first pass the
 issue to the OTRS volunteers who handle BLP problems to examine.

 Why would that need to be dealt with by OTRS volunteers, and not the
 community at large?

 --
 Andy Mabbett
 @pigsonthewing
 http://pigsonthewing.org.uk


That would be because the inmates are not good at running the asylum.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Effective censorship of Wikipedia by Google

2014-08-02 Thread Fred Bauder
Google's motto is Do no evil

I suppose you would have ours be do all notable evil

Fred

 Re:
 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/aug/02/wikipedia-page-google-link-hidden-right-to-be-forgotten

 If Google disappearing a Wikipedia article is a notable news event,
 wouldn't that meet the Wikipedia notability requirements to make an
 article about it?

 The information being disappeared is the 2009 Muslim conversion of
 Adam Osborne, brother of the chancellor, George Osborne.

 Fae
 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Effective censorship of Wikipedia by Google

2014-08-02 Thread Fred Bauder
The title of the article above an image of Jimmy Wales, is: Wikipedia
link to be hidden in Google under 'right to be forgotten' law
Request for blocking of search results granted to anonymous applicant is
first to affect an entry in the online encyclopaedia

Fred

 Re:
 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/aug/02/wikipedia-page-google-link-hidden-right-to-be-forgotten

 If Google disappearing a Wikipedia article is a notable news event,
 wouldn't that meet the Wikipedia notability requirements to make an
 article about it?

 The information being disappeared is the 2009 Muslim conversion of
 Adam Osborne, brother of the chancellor, George Osborne.

 Fae
 --
 fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fuck the community, who cares

2014-04-07 Thread Fred Bauder
Once the money an organization obtain from grants out matches anything
they get from anywhere else they become autonomous. Community support
just becomes a box to check.

Fred

 This week's issue of the English Wikipedia Signpost delivers mildly
 shocking news about the opinion of a prominent female Wikimedian (...)
 about the meaning of the movement and the role of the chapters as
 expressed during the Boards training workshop that took place between
 March 1-2 in London.

 The Wikimedian is quoted by the treasurer of Wikimedia Deutschland,
 Steffen Prößdorf, as saying: if we can buy free knowledge, we should
 do
 that [and] just forget about the communities and Fuck the community,
 who cares.

 I understand that the identity of the person will remain secret, given
 that there is no public list of attendees of the workshop, so let me
 just say that the idea that chapters can fuck the community is
 absolutely unacceptable and should by rejected by all chapters
 immediately.

 Read more at:
 *
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-04-02/News_and_notes
 *
 http://steproe.wordpress.com/2014/04/05/die-sinnfrage-was-ist-der-zweck-von-wikimedia-deutschland/

  Tomasz

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikidata, templates, Modules Lua

2014-01-05 Thread Fred Bauder
 On sv:wp we are several hundreds of competent and active contributers.
 Many of these have limited technical competence, so it will only be
 about a third of these able to enter iw links in wikidata and writing a
 template. This still leaves a few hundreds who easily supports the other
 2/3rds with this competence

 But when in comes understand the other parts of Wikidata and how to get
 that data into articles and templates, the number dwindles leaving only
 about 50 understanding this. It is still enough to discuss and give
 general broader support but it is starting to become a bottleneck in
 implementing broader usage of Wikidata. Then we come to the fact that
 for a successful implementation you need to develop Modules written i
 Lua. And here it is needed full programming comptence, and on sv:wp
 there will only be 5-10 having this level of competence. And this then
 becomes a subcritical mass as these persons  do not have the ambition to
 develop Modules for others. Also two of these competent ones are
 employed by WMSE, perhaps this is typical, if you have that level of
 competence you will be very busy in your paid profession as sw developer.

 We are now in a discussions in WMSE and the community if it would be
 acceptable that chapter resources help in writing Lua code in Modules
 for people in the community in need but lacking that competence? It is
 not a volume or cost issue as it is still no major effort, but more a
 principle one  if if can be Ok in this way to make the Chapter not only
 support the community but also in this direct way creating thing for
 Wikipedia.

 Are there experince from other communities or chapters on this dilemma?

 Anders

If I can do it by myself on Wikinfo, a few people fluent in Swedish and
English can do it for the Swedish Wikipedia; all you need to do is copy
the Wikipedia modules and suitably translate English language into
Swedish where needed.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Rules of engagement for companies in Swedish, Norwegian, Finnish, Danish?

2013-10-21 Thread Fred Bauder
 I'm not sure. Someone who posts deficient article that they obviously
 have
 a special relationship to, where the language in addition is deficient,
 may
 easily be meet by a deletion request. The difficulty with promoting a
 company in Wikipedia is the promotion part, not the identity of the
 author.
 For a well sourced, well written, well structured article that takes a
 neutral point of view about a clearly relevant subject, I cannot see that
 the identity of the author should make much difference. That said,
 obviously there may be someone who disagrees with me in this.

 Hans


What you are saying, in practice, is that a major firm that hires a
professional public relations firm that writes the best sort of article,
from the viewpoint of the firm, that could be expected to be acceptable
is OK, but a crude amateur effort by an inexperienced free-lancer is not.
What makes a Wikipedia article better for a firm if serious attention by
a public relations firm is regularly paid to it is rather subtle. The
brights are a little brighter, the dulls a little less boring, and the
pig is cute.

Fred



 On 21 October 2013 16:07, David Richfield davidrichfi...@gmail.com
 wrote:

 Thanks for the quick reply, Hans!  If our representatives would (for
 example) translate an English company page into Norwegian, and then
 explain the edits on the talk page, and identify their conflict of
 interest on their user pages and also the article talk page, would you
 expect that that would be seen as fair and transparent by the
 Norwegian Wikipedia community?

 On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Hans A. Rosbach
 hans.a.rosb...@gmail.com wrote:
  In no-wp we have a policy that usernames shall be for individuals and
 thus
  typical company usernames are blocked and asked to request change of
 names.
  These users then have no restrictions on which pages to edit. As long
 as
 we
  don't demand identification of users, restrictions on edits would IMO
 be
  futile anyway.
 
  Hans A. Rosbach / User:Haros
 
 
 
  On 21 October 2013 15:14, David Richfield davidrichfi...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
  Hi all,
 
  When I'm not editing Wikimedia projects, I work for Mondelez
  International, and our Social Media team has contacted me for advice
  on responsible engagement with Wikipedia.  I know that different
  language projects have different rules on whether company
  representatives should:
 
  * Edit pages directly or only ever edit talk pages
  * Edit under their own names or under company names
 
  What are the rules for the Nordic languages?
 
  Thanks,
 
  David
 
  --
  David Richfield
  [[:en:User:Slashme]]
  +491723724440
 
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



 --
 David Richfield
 [[:en:User:Slashme]]
 +491723724440

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Global East

2013-10-14 Thread Fred Bauder
A nationalist point of view is not neutral point of view. I can imagine
what the dictator of Kazakstan considers a suitable article.

Fred

 Yesterday Yuri, ED of WMUA (and my college in FDC) was interviewed in
 the main morning program on Swedish Radio re the ua.wp contra ru:wp in
 Ukraine and of Kazak WIkipedia

 The 8 minutes report is half in Swedish and half in English so a bit
 hard to listen to [1]

 The most interesting parts are
 *The Kazak dictator is making all academics in this country to update
 the Kazan version of Wikipedia, perhaps to get it POV but mostly so they
 will not be dependent of ru:wp, ie he sees it as a must to have a decent
 Wikipedia version in order to be independent of the culture from Russia
 *In Ukraine the former education minister (pro eu and pro Ukrainian
 language) actively promoted the ua:wp so not be dependent on ru:wp. The
 current minister have the opposite idea and has made Russian  an
 official second language in the eastern part of Ukraine
 *It seems the university students make it as almost a political choice
 if to use ua:wp or ru:wp, and then in western Ukraine choose ua:wp

 The central role of Wikipedia in theses vital political issues I have
 not heard of from our ordinary western chapters/language versions (or
 is catalonian/Amical an example)

 And reflecting on this, I also think, even if independent,  of the
 dramatic increase of use of arabic and indonesian wikipedia [2] . Also
 of Vietnamese wikipedia which has a tremendous increase in number of
 article  by intellegent use of bots. Also of the very interesting
 development in India, with their many different language versions.

 We here very little (nothing?) from these interesting developments,
 where we all probably can have a lot to learn

 Asaf talks of the problem of getting Global South started as there are
 very weak/missing wp communities. But are we as a movement doing enough
 to support the active communities and developments in the Global East?
 (I can not help also think of Sues words re elections within the
 movement. Do these processes conserve our existing dominance in Board
 and groups of representatives coming from western world?)

 Anders


 [1]
 http://sverigesradio.se/api/radio/radio.aspx?type=dbid=4725418codingformat=.m4ametafile=asx
 [2] http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyCombined.htmtic
 increase of use of arabic wikipedia

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Global East

2013-10-14 Thread Fred Bauder
And that explains an article on the United States full of misinformation
and an article on the Ottoman Empire that is somewhat better? Actually it
does: we have considerable distance from the Ottoman Empire; and little
ability to be objective about ourselves.

Fred

 Hoi,
 Every Wikipedia has its own point of view. They are all not neutral if
 only
 by omission. Do consider the amount of effort that has gone in the
 creation
 of articles relating to the United States of America,. Compare this with
 the coverage of the Ottoman Empire, given that the English Wikipedia is
 used all over the world, its coverage should be of a higher standard. The
 Ottoman Empire represents one of the more relevant civilisations, now
 consider all the countries who are considered to be less relevant...
 Thanks,
   GerardM


 On 14 October 2013 14:57, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

 A nationalist point of view is not neutral point of view. I can imagine
 what the dictator of Kazakstan considers a suitable article.

 Fred

  Yesterday Yuri, ED of WMUA (and my college in FDC) was interviewed in
  the main morning program on Swedish Radio re the ua.wp contra ru:wp
 in
  Ukraine and of Kazak WIkipedia
 
  The 8 minutes report is half in Swedish and half in English so a bit
  hard to listen to [1]
 
  The most interesting parts are
  *The Kazak dictator is making all academics in this country to update
  the Kazan version of Wikipedia, perhaps to get it POV but mostly so
 they
  will not be dependent of ru:wp, ie he sees it as a must to have a
 decent
  Wikipedia version in order to be independent of the culture from
 Russia
  *In Ukraine the former education minister (pro eu and pro Ukrainian
  language) actively promoted the ua:wp so not be dependent on ru:wp.
 The
  current minister have the opposite idea and has made Russian  an
  official second language in the eastern part of Ukraine
  *It seems the university students make it as almost a political
 choice
  if to use ua:wp or ru:wp, and then in western Ukraine choose ua:wp
 
  The central role of Wikipedia in theses vital political issues I have
  not heard of from our ordinary western chapters/language versions
 (or
  is catalonian/Amical an example)
 
  And reflecting on this, I also think, even if independent,  of the
  dramatic increase of use of arabic and indonesian wikipedia [2] .
 Also
  of Vietnamese wikipedia which has a tremendous increase in number of
  article  by intellegent use of bots. Also of the very interesting
  development in India, with their many different language versions.
 
  We here very little (nothing?) from these interesting developments,
  where we all probably can have a lot to learn
 
  Asaf talks of the problem of getting Global South started as there
 are
  very weak/missing wp communities. But are we as a movement doing
 enough
  to support the active communities and developments in the Global
 East?
  (I can not help also think of Sues words re elections within the
  movement. Do these processes conserve our existing dominance in Board
  and groups of representatives coming from western world?)
 
  Anders
 
 
  [1]
 
 http://sverigesradio.se/api/radio/radio.aspx?type=dbid=4725418codingformat=.m4ametafile=asx
  [2]
 http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyCombined.htmtic
  increase of use of arabic wikipedia
 
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe





___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-10-08 Thread Fred Bauder
 I have posted 4 sentences, kind of a draft of a draft of a draft.

 It is very overwhelming for me to draft text with near-legal precision on
 my own.

   -- とある白い猫  (To Aru Shiroi Neko)

I've added a bit. I'll do some copyediting later.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-10-06 Thread Fred Bauder
 On Sat, 5 Oct 2013, at 18:47, Fred Bauder wrote:
 I've been thinking about this. Wikipedia is a compilation of
 information
 from sources that are generally considered reliable. The trouble is
 that
 the information in those sources varies. Rather than deciding
 ourselves,
 after all most of us are amateurs, what the truth is, we present all
 the
 views in reliable sources without trying to decide which is right or
 even
 better, although there may be sourced information which does do that
 which can be included.

 Fred

 This is simply false. If a third source says that one of two reliable
 sources is wrong or simply worse, the third source is not ignored.

It is not simply false. Provided such a criticism is found in a
reliable source, neutral point of view would require it be included. For
example, in a climate change article, information about the poor factual
basis of climate change denial should be included.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-10-05 Thread Fred Bauder
I've been thinking about this. Wikipedia is a compilation of information
from sources that are generally considered reliable. The trouble is that
the information in those sources varies. Rather than deciding ourselves,
after all most of us are amateurs, what the truth is, we present all the
views in reliable sources without trying to decide which is right or even
better, although there may be sourced information which does do that
which can be included.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-10-02 Thread Fred Bauder
 On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 11:53 PM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org
 wrote:
 ...
 I, for one, share your perception that NPOV is a problem on some
 (perhaps
 most) Wikipedias,

 asaf, could you please elaborate a little bit what you mean by this?
 do you not share the experience that the editors were able to come up
 with reasonable and well thought out rules they follow, since
 wikipedia exists? and many of the rules were discussed. and most of
 them discussed again? isn't this one of the cores which made wikipedia
 so successful?

 rupert.

For the most part; however, and I speak only of the English Wikipedia,
there are topics where pov prevails due to the skill and power of its
advocates. I suspect much worse things elsewhere.

By the way, I regularly, and deliberately, engage in point of view
writing elsewhere; I know it when I see it.

Ask yourself, where is the article [[processed food]]? If you want an
good education in public relations techniques, try to write one...

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-17 Thread Fred Bauder
 I am not disputing how settled it is but I don't think meta sufficiently
 achieves expressing how settled this core value really is. As you stated
 it
 would be more of a restatement and re-emphasis of what already is a core
 value.

   -- とある白い猫  (To Aru Shiroi Neko)

Yes, good idea, needs to be done. Please notify the board of directors...

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] : WMF resolution on neutral point of view

2013-09-16 Thread Fred Bauder
 Hi all,

 I realize Resolution:Biographies of living people[1] implies this but I
 fail to see any resolution that establishes neutral point of view as one
 of
 our non-negotiable values. I think there is merit in having an
 over-arching
 resolution on a Neutral Point of View policy.

 I also feel Resolution:Biographies of living people suffers from the
 absence of such a definition of what exactly neutral point of view
 supposed to mean.

 [1]:
 https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Biographies_of_living_people

Neutral point of view is one of the founding principles of Wikipedia and
was promulgated by its founder, Jimmy Wales, and strongly supported by
its co-founder, Larry Sanger, see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_viewdiff=270453oldid=270452#The_original_statement_of_the_neutral_point_of_view_policy

The first edits to the page is dated November 10, 2001 but I think the
very first edits of that page are no longer available. It's not an
unwritten constitution...

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
That was the purpose of the original arbitration committee. Finding a
mentor is kind of hard nowdays as there are so many users who might help
but probably will not. On the other hand, many requests I have received
and looked into are from people who are making trouble themselves;
sometimes very serious trouble. Giving a second chance to someone who has
been banned by the community after extended discussion seldom works out
well. But that's not a newbie who has run into serious trouble just for
making jokes about Windoze...

Fred

 It is very laudable if you, Peter, tries and help newbies and others that
 are harassed by other users.

 I however don't think it is enough in a worldwide organization that you
 have to rely on volunteers and that these will intervene.

 As I see it, if you start such an organization you must also take on the
 responsibilities that follows.
 You can't just duck and pretend that you can hand over all problems to
 the users.

 I still think that an international organization like the Wikis demands
 an instance to which mistreated and mobbed users can turn. An instance
 with the responsibility that normal rules in a society are upheld and
 with the authority to uphold them.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 10:50 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:
 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.

 You mean it's not _solved_. Indeed.

 At least one problem was mentioned in the thread which is that the
 (honest, knowledgeable) newbies have unproportionally smaller
 debating/lobbying power than aboriginals, and they are very easy to
 oppress. This is an ongoing problem for the last decade or so and no
 good solution seem to exist.

 In theory there are (or could be) volunteers who could be called in
 cases of newbie oppression from the experienced troll^H^H^H^Heditors
 who would declare that they try to act as neutral as possible but they
 would possess more experience to handle obnoxious editors and other
 regual beings. Arbitration, mentoring, whatever we like to call it.
 Obviously it only worked if there's a free way to reject a request (if
 the volunteer believes the newbie has no merits, let's not call them
 outright trolls and vandals) and if it isn't an official cabal but a
 large catalog of helpful and experienced editors.

 I have often done it (and still occasionally do on Commons since it's
 a pretty harsh environment for newbies) and it's doable if there's
 enough volunteers and people don't try to do it too often, I mean, one
 in a week or month or so.

 The point is to have a group of random people who are not involved in
 the debate but could help to communicate with the members of the
 community. (Since they're uninvolved it's probably useless to call
 them biased, which is the easiest unargument I've seen in such
 debates.)

 g

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
That's Sweden all right, it's like a small town. Thousands of
administrators from scores of countries is another matter. Even requests
for administration is very difficult as, unless you do big time research,
or spend your life monitoring others edits and activity, you just don't
know much. Voting has the same downside; because of the volume you just
don't have enough information to register an informed opinion, at least
about individuals. The people you encounter in daily activities while
editing is only a tiny sliver.

Fred

 It is no magic
 *yearly reelection of administrators/sysops has meant no bullying types
 are sysops any more
 *we are a small community with just a few hundred active. And we have
 decided to treat everyone (who are serious) as valuable individuals,
 and go a very long way to make all feeling welcome, stop behaving as
 overdog/underdog and also to try special solutions for troublesome users
 that enable them to not being blocked but having restrictions on certain
 type of activities. Both people who have temporary maniac periods and
 with autism symptoms can be useful contributers if handled right by the
 communities.

 But these experiences can not be extended to everywhere. en:wp have 20
 times the number of contributers then sv:wp and of course this means
 need of different ways of handling problems. I do not pretend to have
 anything to teach en:wp, but as said I find nothing useful for sv:wp
 hearing of the challenges on en:wp

 Anders


 Pavlo Shevelo skrev 2013-09-05 13:36:
 Sorry, but I'm not agree with your note, Anders.

 My home WP is not en: (it's uk: in fact) but everything being discussed
 is
 very (100%) applicable for our community.

 Lucky you are in se:WP that you have no similar issues/problems but
 perhaps
 you've collected some magical know-how how to avoid said troubles. If
 so
 would you please share that knowledge  experience?

 Sincerely,
 Pavlo


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Anders Wennersten
 m...@anderswennersten.sewrote:

 Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English
 wikipedia?

 There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can
 recognize from my home wp

 Anders




 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
For a serious discussion to happen you will need to disclose some
examples. The next step is to move beyond anecdote to see if there is a
general problem.

The particular incident Rui brought up has been pretty much explained,
but the question remains about have a new or casual editor who commits a
faux pas can simply be reminded not to rather than being vilified and
being turned away completely. Everyone does dumb stuff, especially at
first. The question is whether they learn anything from it.

Fred

 Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work.
 Not in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius



 
  Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
 An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List
 wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing
 List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work
 now. It could use improvement, but the same could be said about
 everything (and like most things, shortages of volunteers make things
 harder)

 Steve Zhang
 Sent from my iPad



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
Lars,

Please put your cards on the table. What are your suggested changes?

Fred

 I am also more interested in processes than discussing special cases. I
 think that was also the meaning of Rui Correia's letter starting this
 thread.

 To me there is obvious that there are flaws in the construction of the
 Wiki-organization when it comes to mistreatment and mobbing of users. I
 have discussed this question both with the stewards and the ombudsman,
 both tell me that they can't intervene in a Wiki, even if they themselves
 object to the behaviour of certain members of that Wiki.

 That means that there is no instance outside of the specific Wiki to
 which a harassed and mobbed user can turn. That is I think an structural
 error that I believe you don't usually find in any other big
 organization.

 I have also studied these pages where dispute resolution is handled.
 They do not impress me much. I agree with Rui Correia, it is the same
 people quarreling about the same things and the result is often nil.

 So I still think there need to be structural change to handle this type
 of problems.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
 An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 CC: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org;
 fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net
 Gesendet: 15:15 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself



 I've worked extensively with dispute resolution on English Wikipedia (I
 have conducted surveys and so on). If you have specific trends I would
 welcome seeing them (isolated cases where one side is unhappy with the
 result is not necessarily a sign the process is flawed, so I am more
 interested in overall trends but would welcome your opinion.)


 Steve ZhangSent from my iPad

 On 05/09/2013, at 10:59 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:


 Sorry, but I have seen several instances where it certainly doesn't work.
 Not in a way you would expect in a normal society anyhow.

Regards,
Lars Gardenius






 Von: cro0...@gmail.com cro0...@gmail.com
An: Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de; Wikimedia Mailing List
 wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
CC: fredb...@fairpoint.net fredb...@fairpoint.net; Wikimedia Mailing
 List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Gesendet: 14:22 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


I wouldn't say dispute resolution has never worked, nor does it not work
 now. It could use improvement, but the same could be said about
 everything (and like most things, shortages of volunteers make things
 harder)

Steve Zhang
Sent from my iPad

On 05/09/2013, at 6:18 PM, Lars Gardenius lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:

 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.

 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work
 now.

 To imagine that groups of people will not try and manoeuvre out
 persons that they don't like is very naive.
 That has not happened before in the history of mankind and the
  Wikis are no exception.

 Today noone is accountable for what they do to other
 Wiki-contributors, they are not even identifiable since they hide
 behind nome de guerres. Stewards have no authority to protect users
 from abuses and the same goes for the Ombudsman. (see also Rui
 Correia's email)

 So if the Wikis want to be a safe place for children and old folks
 alike, and that everybody shall be able to contribute on equal
 conditions, a more realistic organization to protect the users must be
 put in place.


 Regards
 Lars Gardenius


 
 Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 1:16 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


 It is addressed but by a rather complicated and demanding process. See
 Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Not really workable for new users who
 bump
 up against well-established users who have bad habits, or have learned
 that nasty behavior pays off in being able to control content.

 Fred

 I think you are completely right and it is a big problem in the
 Wiki-world that is not being addressed by anyone in a leading
 position.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
   Von: Rui Correia correia@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 23:08 Mittwoch, 4.September 2013
 Betreff: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 Greetings to All

 Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not
 compared
 to
 people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a
 long
 list
 of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.

 In my

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
Yes, that is pretty much the situation. The howls of outraged anguish
from those who were not able to dictate (really bad) content or practices
form the core of our organized opposition. That does not mean systemic
deficiencies don't exist; just that we must look and think in a noisy
environment.

Fred

 On 09/05/2013 04:18 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't work
 now.

 Where doesn't work is mostly defined as didn't give the result I
 demanded.

 I've been part of that dispute resolution process for many years, and
 came out of it with the (admittedly cynical) lesson that the vast
 majority of vocal critics of it have become so as a result of losing
 to it for having been in the wrong in the first place.

 When someone leaves in a tiff because they have been prevented from
 getting their way against consensus, then the system is arguably doing
 exactly what it's been designed for.

 Of /course/ nobody ends up in a conflict on the projects without being
 convinced that they are in the right; and if they end up on the losing
 side, they will clearly feel that they were wronged.  We play up the
 concept of discussion leading to consensus but -- let's not kid
 ourselves -- we are all humans and thus subject to ego, stubbornness,
 and personality conflicts.

 There *are* no vast, sweeping injustices.  No system is perfect and,
 occasionally, errors *are* made; but the leap from the system didn't
 let me get my way to the system is broken/dying is all to easy to
 make, and is an unavoidable result of humans interacting.

 This certainly could be improved.  More education of users upfront might
 prevent the confrontations in the first place; less reliance on
 established cliques would reduce groupthink and exaggerated
 conservatism.  More robots and fewer humans would reduce the effects of
 human nature...

 -- Marc


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
OP = original poster, Rui

 Sorry but I don't what/who OP is.

 And you still misunderstand. This is not a question about consensus over
 some article, it is about normal human behaviour, and that it sometimes
 is not there. If you haven't seen that happening I don't know where you
 have been looking. I think you paint an idealistic and rosy picture of
 the life in the Wikis that many users don't recognize.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org
 An: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 18:05 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 On 09/05/2013 11:49 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 But if your child is mobbed at a Wiki when he/she tries to contribute,
 or your grandmother is being abused when she contributes to a Wiki, you
 want somewhere to turn. As said there is no such instance in the Wikis,
 there is noone responsible how people are treated and mistreated in the
 Wikis.

 You start from the presumption that those things usually or often happen
 for reasons other than trying to push something through against
 consensus.  I have rarely seen that happening (and no, the OP is not an
 example -- if anything he's an excellent counterexample).

 Mind you, there are often cases where the newbie is going against
 consensus but doesn't know it.  This is a case for user education.

 We /do/ have a problem with the way much of the community handles new
 editors, but the existing mechanism in place /do/ work for the most part
 (at least, for the more egregious examples).  The rest is a cultural
 problem that no enforcement body could fix; you don't make people nice
 by beating them up.

 -- Marc


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
On the contrary, the Arbitration Committee has the responsibility and the
power. That they do not discharge the full remit is another matter.
People have ran for and been elected to the committee on a platform of
not discharging the responsibility it was given.

Fred

 No, I just responded to a problem that I recognized well.

 If you call him/her this or that is not important.

 The important thing is that the person (or group of persons) has the
 responsibility and the power to fulfil its task, i.e. to protect
 Wiki-users from abuses and mobbing. Today nobody has neither that
 responsibility nor that power.

 regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 18:44 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 And your solution is an ombudsman, or what? I know there is a solution
 that you have in mind. In fact, it looks very much like a solution in
 search of a problem. Out with it!

 Fred

 The problem is that howls of outraged anguish seems to come from the
 admins not from the newbies.

 But that was not the question here. The question was that the Wikis
 lack
 an instance that people can turn to when they are harassed and mobbed
 in
 the wikis, be that newbies or admins, children or old folks, women or
 men.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 18:03 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


 Yes, that is pretty much the situation. The howls of outraged anguish
 from those who were not able to dictate (really bad) content or
 practices
 form the core of our organized opposition. That does not mean systemic
 deficiencies don't exist; just that we must look and think in a noisy
 environment.

 Fred

 On 09/05/2013 04:18 AM, Lars Gardenius wrote:
 That Wikipedia:Dispute resolution mirrors a very naive approach in
 a
 worldwide organization. It has never worked before and it doesn't
 work
 now.

 Where doesn't work is mostly defined as didn't give the result I
 demanded.

 I've been part of that dispute resolution process for many years, and
 came out of it with the (admittedly cynical) lesson that the vast
 majority of vocal critics of it have become so as a result of losing
 to it for having been in the wrong in the first place.

 When someone leaves in a tiff because they have been prevented from
 getting their way against consensus, then the system is arguably doing
 exactly what it's been designed for.

 Of /course/ nobody ends up in a conflict on the projects without being
 convinced that they are in the right; and if they end up on the losing
 side, they will clearly feel that they were wronged.  We play up the
 concept of discussion leading to consensus but -- let's not kid
 ourselves -- we are all humans and thus subject to ego, stubbornness,
 and personality conflicts.

 There *are* no vast, sweeping injustices.  No system is perfect and,
 occasionally, errors *are* made; but the leap from the system didn't
 let me get my way to the system is broken/dying is all to easy to
 make, and is an unavoidable result of humans interacting.

 This certainly could be improved.  More education of users upfront
 might
 prevent the confrontations in the first place; less reliance on
 established cliques would reduce groupthink and exaggerated
 conservatism.  More robots and fewer humans would reduce the effects
 of
 human nature...

 -- Marc


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
Indeed, a community a few hundred seems optimal.

Fred

 This is certainly not a question only for the English Wikipedia. I
 somewhat doubt that it even foremost has to do with the English
 Wikipedia. I have seen this problem primarily in smaller Wikis dominated
 by few people.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius



 
  Von: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 CC: wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 13:28 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself


 At wikie...@lists.wikimedia.org ? Perhaps, but hard to start over from
 the beginning.

 Fred

 Should not this discussion be held on he maillist for English
 wikipedia?

 There is not much, if any,  of what is being discussed that I can
 recognize from my home wp

 Anders



 Fred Bauder skrev 2013-09-05 13:18:
 That was the purpose of the original arbitration committee. Finding a
 mentor is kind of hard nowdays as there are so many users who might
 help
 but probably will not. On the other hand, many requests I have
 received
 and looked into are from people who are making trouble themselves;
 sometimes very serious trouble. Giving a second chance to someone who
 has
 been banned by the community after extended discussion seldom works
 out
 well. But that's not a newbie who has run into serious trouble just
 for
 making jokes about Windoze...

 Fred

 It is very laudable if you, Peter, tries and help newbies and others
 that
 are harassed by other users.

 I however don't think it is enough in a worldwide organization that
 you
 have to rely on volunteers and that these will intervene.

 As I see it, if you start such an organization you must also take on
 the
 responsibilities that follows.
 You can't just duck and pretend that you can hand over all problems
 to
 the users.

 I still think that an international organization like the Wikis
 demands
 an instance to which mistreated and mobbed users can turn. An
 instance
 with the responsibility that normal rules in a society are upheld and
 with the authority to uphold them.

 Regards,
 Lars Gardenius




 
   Von: Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com
 An: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Gesendet: 10:50 Donnerstag, 5.September 2013
 Betreff: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from
 itself


 On Thu, Sep 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Lars Gardenius
 lars.garden...@yahoo.de
 wrote:
 No I don't think it is being addressed. Not in a serious way.
 You mean it's not _solved_. Indeed.

 At least one problem was mentioned in the thread which is that the
 (honest, knowledgeable) newbies have unproportionally smaller
 debating/lobbying power than aboriginals, and they are very easy to
 oppress. This is an ongoing problem for the last decade or so and no
 good solution seem to exist.

 In theory there are (or could be) volunteers who could be called in
 cases of newbie oppression from the experienced troll^H^H^H^Heditors
 who would declare that they try to act as neutral as possible but
 they
 would possess more experience to handle obnoxious editors and other
 regual beings. Arbitration, mentoring, whatever we like to call it.
 Obviously it only worked if there's a free way to reject a request
 (if
 the volunteer believes the newbie has no merits, let's not call them
 outright trolls and vandals) and if it isn't an official cabal but
 a
 large catalog of helpful and experienced editors.

 I have often done it (and still occasionally do on Commons since it's
 a pretty harsh environment for newbies) and it's doable if there's
 enough volunteers and people don't try to do it too often, I mean,
 one
 in a week or month or so.

 The point is to have a group of random people who are not involved in
 the debate but could help to communicate with the members of the
 community. (Since they're uninvolved it's probably useless to call
 them biased, which is the easiest unargument I've seen in such
 debates.)

 g

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please, let's save the Wikipedia - from itself

2013-09-05 Thread Fred Bauder
No thank you, I do not have a dispute; you do; please follow the dispute
resolution procedure.

Fred

 Hi  Tom

 Thanks for your contribution. However, you seem to have missed the point.

 So Lisa violates the 3RR principle and you lecture me. And I lodge a
 complaint over the 3RR and that gets closed without due process.

 Would you care to touch on those tho aspects and advance your opinion on
 the 3RR violation being swept under the carpet? And reporting of a 3RR
 violation being swept under the same carpet?

 I must presume that you condone the action of the other editor?

 And for your information, everytime I have come across people that
 monitor
 even the talkpage of their favourite articles you can be sure that it is
 about the content of what is posted, but about whether or not the comment
 casts the subject of the article in a bad light.

 Perhaps you might care to look into this and look into the edit history
 of
 these editors?

 Regards,

 Rui




 On 5 September 2013 14:18, Thomas Morton
 morton.tho...@googlemail.comwrote:

 Lets just be clear here, the contributuion Rui is talking about was as
 follows:

 Must be a joke - how can moving from W8 to W XP be called a downgrade?
 W8
 is crap! I want a computer, not a basket of apps for retarded
 morons!
 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Windows_XPoldid=571533769
 

 His response to its removal is to suggest those removing it are paid
 Pro-Microsoft editors.

 Rui, what I'm going to suggest here is that you've not really
 understood
 the processes that go into collaborating on an article. You may well be
 right that the content needs changing, but your presentation of a
 personal
 opinion in such a ranting form makes it very hard to collaborate.

 Look at it from another side. If you'd put a lot of effort into writing
 and
 article and then someone turned up on the talk page to post what looked
 like a personal rant about the content, citing no sources and putting
 very
 little in the way of suggested changes would you be peeved? Would
 you
 wonder if perhaps that editor was a paid editor sent to disrupt the
 article
 by a competitor?

 Would you be offended if Lisa held that view about you (that you were a
 paid advocate?).

 So, yes, Wikipedia has a big problem. But it's not just abusive admins
 (we
 have a few) and grumpy editors, or paid advocates. It is a broad
 spectrum
 of problems - and in this case you were the one with the
 less-than-perfect
 contribution.

 Broadly speaking this is an education problem; we need to bring more
 focus
 on the concept of the talk page as a collaboration portal *not* as a
 place
 to discuss the topic (i.e. NOTFORUM) and we also need to emphasise the
 importance of making comments in the right tone, and with supporting
 sources.

 Regards,
 Tom


 On 4 September 2013 22:08, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote:

  Greetings to All
 
  Let me start by saying that I don't do much here at the WP, not
 compared
 to
  people who make hundreds of edits a week. I would love to, have a
 long
 list
  of to-do, but unfortunately time is not on my side.
 
  In my limited involvemet here, I have seen many a good editor leave
 the
  project. Mostly, people leave because they can't take it anymore
 having
 to
  fight the 'blocks' of defenders that coalesce around certain topics.
 
  In itself, though not very healthy, such blocks forming around topis
 is
  fine. What is not fine is that if any issue gets referred to a higher
  process for a resolution, it is often the same people grouping of
 people
  previously involved in disputes on the same topic who come to the
  resolution forum to issue a decision. However, it is always the
 'outsider'
  that loses. He gets acused of everything under the sun, and gets
 'good
  advice' from supposedly neutral editors, urging him to calm down, to
 temper
  his language etc. It is like trying to point out that the earth is
 round
 at
  a monthly meetng of the fat-earthers. That is not healthy and is
 making
 the
  WP processes look like a kangaroo court run by a cabal.
 
  And I expect pretty much the same reaction to this email.
 
  I pointed out in an ealier email to this list the difficulty that one
  encounters when you include something negative about certain big
  corporations. I was stoned and made to feel that I was wrong and
 everbody
  else was right. The reaction was tantamount to a chorus of yes, we
 know
  there are problems, but don't say it out loud, someone might hear
 you!.
 
  Let's for argument's say that I was wrong. But - more importantantly
 -
 was
  anything done to investigate what I was saying? What if there are
 legions
  out there paid to sanitise the pages of big corporations? And we know
 that
  they exist, and that WP has taken up the issue as in here,
 
 
 http://nick-xomba-ceo.xomba.com/microsoft_accused_of_paying_blogger_to_alter_wikipedia_articles
 
  I made a silly remark on a Talk page about the choice of the word
  downgrade 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and the politics of encryption

2013-09-03 Thread Fred Bauder
Any censor from the United States or European governments that works
directly with us (I have no personal knowledge of this, I just know it
has to be) is concerned with classified information, not someone's
opinions or factual information about historical events or political
personalities.

Detailed information about construction of advanced nuclear weapons or
the details of military or intelligence operations cannot be on Wikipedia
just as child pornography cannot be; on the other hand, a distorted, or
devastatingly accurate picture, of the Iraq War, or Obama, can be.

So, while the details of material removed for legitimate security reasons
cannot be published; in China the identity and any personal information
we have gathered such as the ip address of an editor and the content of
their edits to the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 article would be of
interest to the security apparatus and classified. Any local employee or
volunteer of ours who shared that information with others even within our
organization could be prosecuted. It is quite impossible to work with the
Chinese government in the manner suggested and maintain a scintilla of
integrity. A request by them to remove details about their advanced
nuclear weapons or specific details of their military deployments would,
of course, be legitimate.

The Chinese government has legitimate reason to avoid extensive public
attention to past errors and disasters; one has only to look at the
history of the Soviet Union to observe the effect of focusing on past
outrages on public morale, but that is their burden to bear not ours to
share.

Fred

 Hoi,

 Fred, what is different in your scenario from what happens in the USA ?

 Thanks,
   GerardM


 On 3 September 2013 00:23, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

  On 31/08/13 15:17, Erik Moeller wrote:
  It could be argued
  that it’s time to draw a line in the sand - if you’re
 prohibiting
  the
  use of encryption, you’re effectively not part of the web.
 You’re
  subverting basic web technologies.
 
  China is not prohibiting encryption. They're prohibiting specific
  instances of encryption which facilitate circumvention of censorship.
 
  So, what to do? My main suggestion is to organize a broad request
 for
  comments and input on possible paths forward.
 
  OK, well there's one fairly obvious solution which hasn't been
  proposed or discussed. It would allow the end-to-end encryption and
  would allow us to stay as popular in China as we are now.
 
  We could open a data centre in China, send frontend requests from
  clients in China to that data centre, and comply with local
 censorship
  and surveillance as required to continue such operation.
 
  It would be kind of like the cooperation we give to the US government
  at the moment, except specific to readers in China instead of imposed
  on everyone in the world.
 
  It would allow WMF to monitor censorship and surveillance by being in
  the request loop. It would give WMF greater influence over local
  policy, because our staff would be in direct contact with their
 staff.
  We would be able to deliver clear error messages in place of censored
  content, instead of a connection reset.
 
  -- Tim Starling

 Their orders would be classified; disclosure of them would be a crime.
 Not a problem for us, but a big problem for staff on the ground in
 China.

 Fred


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe





___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and the politics of encryption

2013-09-03 Thread Fred Bauder
And from that assertion what practical action or policy should follow?

Fred

 Fred,

 Sorry, there is no us. As far as the United States is concerned they
 allowed themselves to spy on any person who is not one of US to be speid
 on. Given that our movement is a global movement, the fact that it is
 based
 in the US is incidental.
 Thanks,
   GerardM


 On 3 September 2013 14:36, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

 Any censor from the United States or European governments that works
 directly with us (I have no personal knowledge of this, I just know it
 has to be) is concerned with classified information, not someone's
 opinions or factual information about historical events or political
 personalities.

 Detailed information about construction of advanced nuclear weapons or
 the details of military or intelligence operations cannot be on
 Wikipedia
 just as child pornography cannot be; on the other hand, a distorted, or
 devastatingly accurate picture, of the Iraq War, or Obama, can be.

 So, while the details of material removed for legitimate security
 reasons
 cannot be published; in China the identity and any personal information
 we have gathered such as the ip address of an editor and the content of
 their edits to the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 article would be
 of
 interest to the security apparatus and classified. Any local employee
 or
 volunteer of ours who shared that information with others even within
 our
 organization could be prosecuted. It is quite impossible to work with
 the
 Chinese government in the manner suggested and maintain a scintilla of
 integrity. A request by them to remove details about their advanced
 nuclear weapons or specific details of their military deployments
 would,
 of course, be legitimate.

 The Chinese government has legitimate reason to avoid extensive public
 attention to past errors and disasters; one has only to look at the
 history of the Soviet Union to observe the effect of focusing on past
 outrages on public morale, but that is their burden to bear not ours to
 share.

 Fred

  Hoi,
 
  Fred, what is different in your scenario from what happens in the USA
 ?
 
  Thanks,
GerardM
 
 
  On 3 September 2013 00:23, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 wrote:
 
   On 31/08/13 15:17, Erik Moeller wrote:
   It could be argued
   that it’s time to draw a line in the sand - if
 you’re
  prohibiting
   the
   use of encryption, you’re effectively not part
 of the web.
  You’re
   subverting basic web technologies.
  
   China is not prohibiting encryption. They're prohibiting specific
   instances of encryption which facilitate circumvention of
 censorship.
  
   So, what to do? My main suggestion is to organize a broad request
  for
   comments and input on possible paths forward.
  
   OK, well there's one fairly obvious solution which hasn't been
   proposed or discussed. It would allow the end-to-end encryption
 and
   would allow us to stay as popular in China as we are now.
  
   We could open a data centre in China, send frontend requests from
   clients in China to that data centre, and comply with local
  censorship
   and surveillance as required to continue such operation.
  
   It would be kind of like the cooperation we give to the US
 government
   at the moment, except specific to readers in China instead of
 imposed
   on everyone in the world.
  
   It would allow WMF to monitor censorship and surveillance by being
 in
   the request loop. It would give WMF greater influence over local
   policy, because our staff would be in direct contact with their
  staff.
   We would be able to deliver clear error messages in place of
 censored
   content, instead of a connection reset.
  
   -- Tim Starling
 
  Their orders would be classified; disclosure of them would be a
 crime.
  Not a problem for us, but a big problem for staff on the ground in
  China.
 
  Fred
 
 
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 



 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe





___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and the politics of encryption

2013-09-03 Thread Fred Bauder
I guess emergencies should not go to legal as there may be a considerable
delay.

Fred


 Are there more successful attempts?

 It would be difficult to enumerate successful attempts since, by
 definition, they would have been successful at not being known.  :-)
 -- Marc

 I once suppressed information about a troop movement underway in Iraq
 after a request. Troop movements are explicitly mentioned in the
 Espionage Act.

 Such requests, and other requests regarding obviously illegal material,
 should go to legal at wikimedia.org or emergency at wikimedia.org at the
 Foundation rather than to User:Oversight, by the way. There is a whole
 bunch of people on the oversight committee none of whom are known to have
 security clearances.

 Fred


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and the politics of encryption

2013-09-03 Thread Fred Bauder

 Are there more successful attempts?

 It would be difficult to enumerate successful attempts since, by
 definition, they would have been successful at not being known.  :-)
 -- Marc

I once suppressed information about a troop movement underway in Iraq
after a request. Troop movements are explicitly mentioned in the
Espionage Act.

Such requests, and other requests regarding obviously illegal material,
should go to legal at wikimedia.org or emergency at wikimedia.org at the
Foundation rather than to User:Oversight, by the way. There is a whole
bunch of people on the oversight committee none of whom are known to have
security clearances.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Block evasion might be a federal offense

2013-08-21 Thread Fred Bauder
 On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 4:09 AM, Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Martijn Hoekstra
 martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
 On Aug 21, 2013 8:56 AM, Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com wrote:

 The account and/or underlying IP is
 blocked. That is the technical impediment. The action that is now a
 federal
 offense, it seems, is to defy the warning, by circumventing the block
 by
 changing IP and/or account to do what you were told not to do on the
 warning.

 Technicalities aside if I follow you right then it is a federal
 offense to edit Wikipedia when you were told not to (eg. banned but
 _not_ blocked). If that's the case the IP part of the discussion is
 mainly irrelevant as one does not have to evade a block to violate the
 ban.

 The central issue though, that it
 seems block evasion is a federal offense, is not affected by the
 difficulty
 in proving evidence for it. It is the question whether the evasion is
 a
 crime that bothers me.

 [insert meetoo here]

 g


 This is actually incorrect, as were some of your comments about the
 irrelevance of IP blocks in your prior post. Have a look at some of
 the links I posted earlier in the thread, I think the issues should
 become more clear.

 To FT2's comments - it's not actually true that the IP ban, or a cease
 and desist, have to be specific to a person. In fact in the linked
 case, they are blanket to a company. I see no particular reason why
 the same reasoning can't be applied to a school, or a church. A
 geographic area is probably harder to support. Additionally, we
 generally give warnings, and block accounts. For the most egregious
 harassment, the only instances I can see this ever coming into play
 for Wikimedia, virtually every perpetrator has a long history of
 blocked user accounts. I think that makes the debate over the
 personally identifying nature of IPs irrelevant for this discussion.

Although I don't think it rose to the level that a federal court would
take it seriously the Scientology socks are an example. There, ips were
usually irrelevant as was the individual identity of users; although we
knew a few.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] A Survey on Science Reporting

2013-08-21 Thread Fred Bauder
If you write or add to articles based on journal articles you might
complete this survey:

https://lsucommunications.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_0PTVlA7OUCLqkyV

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Block evasion might be a federal offense

2013-08-19 Thread Fred Bauder
 http://feedly.com/k/14WeLcY

 I wish I was grossly misrepresenting the situation here. If I am, please
 do
 set me straight.

You're not wrong, but getting the attention of a federal prosecutor would
be easier for jaywalking in a National Park. It applies only to extreme
situations.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why the WP will never be a real encyclopaedia

2013-08-01 Thread Fred Bauder
 Dear Colleagues at the Foundation

 I just came across an artecle called White Africans of European
 ancestry.
 What is that even supposed to mean?  Who would be any other white
 people
 if not of Europen ancestry?

The Ainu people, not that it matters.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] NSA

2013-07-31 Thread Fred Bauder
See attachment.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data

Fred___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NSA

2013-07-31 Thread Fred Bauder
 See attachment.

 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data

the NSA has created a multi-tiered system that allows analysts to store
interesting content in other databases, such as one named Pinwale which
can store material for up to five years. 

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NSA

2013-07-31 Thread Fred Bauder
Look at the attached image.

Fred

 Hmmm, the word wiki isn't named anywhere.


 On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:43 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:

 Apparently Wikipedia was or is one of the targeted websites.

 Risker


 On 31 July 2013 15:42, Huib Laurens sterke...@gmail.com wrote:

  How is this related to the foundation?
 
 
  On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 9:22 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
  wrote:
 
   See attachment.
  
  
  
 
 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data
  
   Fred
   ___
   Wikimedia-l mailing list
   Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
   Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
   mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
  
 
 
 
  --
  Met vriendelijke groet,
 
  Huib Laurens
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
  Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
  mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
 
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




 --
 Met vriendelijke groet,

 Huib Laurens
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NSA

2013-07-31 Thread Fred Bauder
I think it's more reasonable to assume that
 Wikipedia (which shares many features with Google, Yahoo, Twitter,
 Facebook and other social networks) has been the subject of this kind
 of demand than that it hasn't. No one with direct knowledge would be
 able to do anything other than deny it, but we can easily see why data
 held by Wikipedia (including partially anonymized e-mails, file
 uploads, talk page communication, etc.) would be of interest to
 intelligence agencies.

The capacity of the Wikimedia Foundation to keep a secret of this nature
is law. Simply too many outlaws; something NSA could probably figure out;
they are not called intelligence for nothing.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] NSA

2013-07-31 Thread Fred Bauder
I think it's more reasonable to assume that
 Wikipedia (which shares many features with Google, Yahoo, Twitter,
Facebook and other social networks) has been the subject of this kind
of demand than that it hasn't. No one with direct knowledge would be
able to do anything other than deny it, but we can easily see why data
held by Wikipedia (including partially anonymized e-mails, file
 uploads, talk page communication, etc.) would be of interest to
 intelligence agencies.

The capacity of the Wikimedia Foundation to keep a secret of this nature
is low. Simply too many outlaws; something NSA could probably figure out;
they are not called intelligence for nothing.

Fred

Changed law to low


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's have the courage to sit down and talk about VisualEditor

2013-07-30 Thread Fred Bauder
 On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:13 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:

 de:wp convinced you. What would it take to convince you on en:wp? (I'm
 asking for a clear objective criterion here. If you can only offer a
 subjective one, please explain how de:wp convinced you when en:wp
 hasn't.)


 [Speaking personally, not for the VE team in any way.]

 Why should a consensus of any arbitrary number of power editors be
 allowed
 to define the defaults for all editors, including anonymous and
 newly-registered people? Anonymous edits make up about 1/3 of enwiki
 edits,
 IIRC. Every day, 3,000-5,000 new accounts are registered on English
 Wikipedia. These people are not even being asked to participate in these
 RFCs. Even if they were, they typically don't know how to participate and
 find it very intimidating.

 This system of gauging the success of VE is heavily biased toward the
 concerns of people most likely to dislike change in the software and
 frankly, to not really need VE in its current state. That doesn't mean
 they're wrong, just that they don't speak for everyone's perspective. The
 sad fact is that the people who stand to benefit the most from continued
 use and improvements to VE can't participate in an RFC about it, in part
 because of wikitext's complexities and annoyances. It is a huge failure
 of
 the consensus process and the Wikimedia movement if we pretend that it's
 truly open, fair, and inclusive to make a decision about VE this way.

 In WMF design and development, we work our butts off trying to do
 research,
 design, and data analysis that guides us toward building for _all_ the
 stakeholders in a feature. We're not perfect at it by a long shot, but I
 don't see a good faith effort by English and German Wikipedians running
 these RFCs to solicit and consider the opinions of the huge number of
 new/anonymous editors. And why should they? That's not their job, they
 just
 want to express their frustration and be listened to.

 To answer David's question: I think we need a benchmark for making VE
 opt-in again that legitimately represents the needs of _all the people_
 who
 stand to benefit from continuing the rapid pace of bug fixing and feature
 additions. I don't think an on-wiki RFC is it.

 Steven

Let me confess, I hate all new things. I hate the constantly changing
complicated wiki markup and I hate the new editor, cause I don't know how
to work it even if it would be simpler if I were starting from scratch.
The point was to design an editor that would be better for casual and new
editors; I have nothing whatever to add from my own experience because I
can't duplicate from my experience that of a casual or new editor.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Progress...

2013-07-26 Thread Fred Bauder
As with other inventions that produced an inferior product at a much
lower price, from the printing press to the steam-driven loom to
Wikipedia, what happens now is largely in the hands of the people
experimenting with the new tools, rather than defending themselves from
them.

http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/07/08/moocs-and-economic-reality/

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Progress...

2013-07-26 Thread Fred Bauder
 On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 wrote:

 As with other inventions that produced an inferior product at a much
 lower price, from the printing press to the steam-driven loom to
 Wikipedia, what happens now is largely in the hands of the people
 experimenting with the new tools, rather than defending themselves from
 them.


 http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/07/08/moocs-and-economic-reality/

 Fred



 Those bloody kids and their newfangled inventions like the steam loom and
 the printing press just don't have any respect any more.

 I seriously have no idea what that paragraph is trying to say.

A teaching moment... if not a learning one.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Progress...

2013-07-26 Thread Fred Bauder
 Hoi,

 Sorry Fred, I do not like your post. The quote has it wrong because
 research shows that it is factually wrong. Wikipedia has a better
 coverage
 at a superior quality to the encyclopaedia that went before. The only
 thing
 I can agree with is that it is available at a much lower cost; it is the
 cost of having access to the Internet.

 As a consequence why should I read it ?
 Thanks,
GerardM

If systemic biased editing is not considered your statement would be
true. However, one of the side effects of our volunteeristic methods is
that systemic bias resulting from editing by groups and interests with
numberless agendas is inevitable; not that Britannica was without certain
systemic biases. Wikipedia does not have good editorial control and can
never have it. Gresham's law is at work; no printed book has the beauty
and quality of the Lindisfarne Gospels; nothing made on a machine loom
compares remotely with Navajo weaving.

Fred



 On 26 July 2013 13:48, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

 As with other inventions that produced an inferior product at a much
 lower price, from the printing press to the steam-driven loom to
 Wikipedia, what happens now is largely in the hands of the people
 experimenting with the new tools, rather than defending themselves from
 them.


 http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/07/08/moocs-and-economic-reality/

 Fred


 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
I just checked the archives. The original message was not received by the
mailing list, for whatever reason, probably misaddressed. This message of
inquiry is the first message in the tread. I think you should resend the
original message if your mail program permits that. Sounds interesting...

Fred

 I've have my setting on receive copy of own emails, but did not receive
 this email that I sent out. Can someone please confirm?

 Regards,

 On 22 July 2013 18:02, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote:

 Dear All

 It is certainly not news that a lot of deliberately biased editing goes
 on
 on the Wikipedia. It is equally known that there are mechanims to
 address
 these issues.

 But that is where the problem lies - those intent on skewing
 information
 know all the tricks and loopholes, whereas neutral editors who pass by
 to
 add something they came across are not so clued up. Most editors that
 get
 reverted just move on and don't bother. This leads to the 'ownsership'
 syndrome, with editors shooing away anybody that adds anuthing they
 don't
 like. The bigger problem, is when these editors who act as if they
 'own'
 certain articles are actually either being paid to do so or are
 actually
 lomked to an organisation with particilar interests in the page(s).

 A case in point, the other day I was looking for images of mosquitos
 sucking blood and and came across blatant pornography on Flickr. I
 added a
 few lines about pornography on Flickr and because it was reverted (I
 admit
 the edit was not sterling worsmithing) it made me look into the history
 of
 the page.

 That there are two or three editors who automatically revert anything
 negative is obvious. Less obvious is that one of these editors was
 'dormant' for a year-and-a-half, then suddenly came out of hibernation
 2
 months ago to exclusively counter any anti-Flickr edits and add
 pro-Flickr
 edits - about 75 edits in 2 months. And one or 2 sanitsing the page of
 Marissa Mayer, the CEO of Yahoo!, (which owns Flickr). Another has
 practically admitted to having some kind of association with Flickr
 (there
 is plenty in Flickr-related debates on user pages to prove that there
 is
 indeed a sinsiter and unhealthy relationship. The two or three work in
 a
 concerted manner, even replying on behalf of each other, which makes
 suspect the presence of sockpuppets or similar. There is also a
 high-school
 student among the reverters. Things are now at a point that they are
 making
 rules, 'agreeing' with those against them on the maximum length of a
 section of a Flickr controversy. No such limitations on any other
 (positive) aspect of the article. They have have 'agreed' that a number
 of
 Huffington Post comments on Flickr must not be included - it is not a
 relaible source, apparently..

 This would not have bothered me were it not for the fact that the
 Flickr
 article is of an adequate size, with lots of good information on it and
 most of it quite complimentary. It is worrying that a few lines of bad
 press should so annoy people that they are on stand-by to revert at
 whatever hour of day or night.

 The mechanisms that the Wikipedia has created to improve the project
 play
 into the hands of people like these - features such as the watchlist.
 Within minutes of a change, it gets reverted. Sometimes an editor will
 persist for a while, but eventually walks off and goes edit elsewhere.
 Which is odd, because if there are mechanisms for redress, why not use
 them? Unfortunately, in my experience, whenever anything is put up for
 arbitration, the first ones on the scene include the very editors
 involved
 or others whom they trust who get tipped off about the issue as soon as
 it
 develops. It is this that is tarnishing the name of the Wikipedia and
 driving away good editors.

 I use Flickr as an example, but is it not the firwst time that I have
 come
 across this type of behaviour.
 And so, tiny cliques and coteries flourish like fiefdoms in the blind
 spots of the mechanisms created to ensure that we all strive for the
 same
 principes. What is worse, there are big players behind this all. In an
 age
 when the so-called 'big media' is already overwhelmingly in the service
 of
 'big business', we owe to ourselves to keep them out of the WP.

 Regards,

 Rui Correia.



 --
 _
 Rui Correia
 Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Work Consultant
 Bridge to Angola - Angola Liaison Consultant

 Mobile Number in South Africa +27 74 425 4186
 Número de Telemóvel na África do Sul +27 74 425 4186
 ___





 --
 _
 Rui Correia
 Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Work Consultant
 Bridge to Angola - Angola Liaison Consultant

 Mobile Number in South Africa +27 74 425 4186
 Número de Telemóvel na África do Sul +27 74 425 4186
 ___
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
 I just checked the archives. The original message was not received by the
 mailing list, for whatever reason, probably misaddressed. This message of
 inquiry is the first message in the tread. I think you should resend the
 original message if your mail program permits that. Sounds interesting...

Wait, I lied. Here it is:

http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-July/127077.html

I don't know if I received it, as I delete almost all messages.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

[Wikimedia-l] Resend: The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
Resent so I have an original copy to reply to.

Dear All

It is certainly not news that a lot of deliberately biased editing goes on
on the Wikipedia. It is equally known that there are mechanims to address
these issues.

But that is where the problem lies - those intent on skewing information
know all the tricks and loopholes, whereas neutral editors who pass by to
add something they came across are not so clued up. Most editors that get
reverted just move on and don't bother. This leads to the 'ownsership'
syndrome, with editors shooing away anybody that adds anuthing they don't
like. The bigger problem, is when these editors who act as if they 'own'
certain articles are actually either being paid to do so or are actually
lomked to an organisation with particilar interests in the page(s).

A case in point, the other day I was looking for images of mosquitos
sucking blood and and came across blatant pornography on Flickr. I added a
few lines about pornography on Flickr and because it was reverted (I admit
the edit was not sterling worsmithing) it made me look into the history of
the page.

That there are two or three editors who automatically revert anything
negative is obvious. Less obvious is that one of these editors was
'dormant' for a year-and-a-half, then suddenly came out of hibernation 2
months ago to exclusively counter any anti-Flickr edits and add pro-Flickr
edits - about 75 edits in 2 months. And one or 2 sanitsing the page of
Marissa Mayer, the CEO of Yahoo!, (which owns Flickr). Another has
practically admitted to having some kind of association with Flickr (there
is plenty in Flickr-related debates on user pages to prove that there is
indeed a sinsiter and unhealthy relationship. The two or three work in a
concerted manner, even replying on behalf of each other, which makes
suspect the presence of sockpuppets or similar. There is also a high-school
student among the reverters. Things are now at a point that they are making
rules, 'agreeing' with those against them on the maximum length of a
section of a Flickr controversy. No such limitations on any other
(positive) aspect of the article. They have have 'agreed' that a number of
Huffington Post comments on Flickr must not be included - it is not a
relaible source, apparently..

This would not have bothered me were it not for the fact that the Flickr
article is of an adequate size, with lots of good information on it and
most of it quite complimentary. It is worrying that a few lines of bad
press should so annoy people that they are on stand-by to revert at
whatever hour of day or night.

The mechanisms that the Wikipedia has created to improve the project play
into the hands of people like these - features such as the watchlist.
Within minutes of a change, it gets reverted. Sometimes an editor will
persist for a while, but eventually walks off and goes edit elsewhere.
Which is odd, because if there are mechanisms for redress, why not use
them? Unfortunately, in my experience, whenever anything is put up for
arbitration, the first ones on the scene include the very editors involved
or others whom they trust who get tipped off about the issue as soon as it
develops. It is this that is tarnishing the name of the Wikipedia and
driving away good editors.

I use Flickr as an example, but is it not the firwst time that I have come
across this type of behaviour.
And so, tiny cliques and coteries flourish like fiefdoms in the blind spots
of the mechanisms created to ensure that we all strive for the same
principes. What is worse, there are big players behind this all. In an age
when the so-called 'big media' is already overwhelmingly in the service of
'big business', we owe to ourselves to keep them out of the WP.

Regards,

Rui Correia.



-- 
_
Rui Correia
Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Work Consultant
Bridge to Angola - Angola Liaison Consultant

Mobile Number in South Africa +27 74 425 4186
Número de Telemóvel na África do Sul +27 74 425 4186



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resend: The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder


 I use Flickr as an example, but is it not the firwst time that I have
 come
 across this type of behaviour.
 And so, tiny cliques and coteries flourish like fiefdoms in the blind
 spots
 of the mechanisms created to ensure that we all strive for the same
 principes. What is worse, there are big players behind this all. In an
 age
 when the so-called 'big media' is already overwhelmingly in the service
 of
 'big business', we owe to ourselves to keep them out of the WP.

 Regards,

 Rui Correia.

Well, it is hardly the first time any of us of have encountered possible
conflict of interest. For example, there is no article on Wikipedia with
the title processed food. Try to create one and watch and learn...

All I can say is that we do our best in a difficult environment.
Corporations, political movements, and nation states, have substantial
budgets and talent is out there for the hiring.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resend: The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder

 A case in point, the other day I was looking for images of mosquitos
 sucking blood and and came across blatant pornography on Flickr. I added
 a
 few lines about pornography on Flickr and because it was reverted

 Rui Correia.

The Flickr images you linked to, if it was you, were the sort one pays
for... on a pornography site. Not good to post the links. The question is
whether there is information about these sorts of images on Flickr
published in a reliable source. I don't know the answer to that question.

Here is the deal: Wikipedia is not an independent search for truth and
repository of the results. It is a compendium of information published in
reasonably reliable sources. A summary of generally accepted human
knowledge.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Resend: The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder

 It is this that is tarnishing the name of the Wikipedia and
 driving away good editors.


 Rui Correia.


When the going gets tough the tough get going. They don't throw their
hands up, vainly protest, then give up.

Possible conflict of interest is a legitimate concern; however, it is not
a simple straightforward matter. Particular editors with troublesome
editing patterns can have multiple motives, and sometimes are simply
editing in good faith.

You're welcome to hang in there and fully participate in both editing and
discussing possible conflict of interest, just as you are welcome to
handle nitro provided you follow the rules. I assume you have not been
blocked yet.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
 On 07/23/2013 02:03 PM, Todd Allen wrote:
 I
 don't think such a proposal would be hopeless on en.

 How did dewiki circumvent the difficulties regarding attribution and
 role accounts?  Last I checked, our terms of use prohibit password
 sharing, and IIRC Mike Godwin (legal counsel at the time) stated there
 were some serious issues with the idea of contributions not being
 credited to an individual.

 -- Marc

The corporation, or whatever, itself would have to sign off legally. It
would have to control access to the account. It could hire a public
relations firm if that were part of our deal with them.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Fred Bauder
 Thanks Andreas

 Iit didn't cross my mind that you would actually go and check - at the
 time
 the search terms were in Portuguese, so you will probably find different
 results - If I find the original pic I will send it to you.

 But more importantly, the porn on Flickr is a secondary issue - the
 intent
 of my email was to draw attention to the possibility of corporate control
 of the information, which you have already addressed.

 I saw something about CHECKUSER, and that special procedures must be
 followed to 'out' such people - or reveal possible sockpuppet or
 one-purpose accounts. I'll look into those and let you know.

 Best regards,

 Rui

Checkuser is done only when it seems someone is creating multiple
accounts and abusing them in some way. In instances of concerted conflict
of interest editing it doesn't really matter whether there is one person,
many, or a group or firm behind the edits. They are treated as socks
because of their manner of editing, not because of technical proof of
identity.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia in trouble /yet/ again

2013-07-10 Thread Fred Bauder


 If you post a creative work on a website the purpose which is to share
 files you have assumed the rights of the owner, one of which is to
 determine the conditions which must be met to view or listen to the
 work.
 The owner can give his work away to the world but not third parties.

 Fred

 What are you saying has been stolen here? The work itself, the copy of
 it,
 or the copyright in the work?
 There are serious problems in trying to bend the law of theft to any of
 them.

It is easiest to analyze if the work has never been published.
Distributing it then is a taking of intellectual property regardless of
whether the original is physically taken or only a copy. The theft is of
the possible gain lost. Actually, rather like claim jumping. It is not
the ore that is lost but the right to mine it and profit from it.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia in trouble /yet/ again

2013-07-09 Thread Fred Bauder
I don't get it. I was able to use a Wikipedia link to find a place to
download The Searchers, a John Ford film starring John Wayne in about 30
seconds. How is that not theft that we are facilitating?

Fred


 Hi there,
 two months after the smoking cannabis controversy, the Russian
 Wikipedia is in trouble again, this time over an anti-piracy legislation
 that will come into force on August 1 and which might result in
 Wikipedia as a whole -- not just a few articles -- being blacklisted in
 the country.

 The Russian parliament introduced anti-drug and anti-child pornography
 legislation last year, and it's already successfully used to censor
 encyclopaedic articles, so I guess it's time for more radical steps now;
 the new law might lead to banning websites that just /link/ to sites
 which hold content copyrighted by others.

 RIA Novosti has more information on the subject:
 http://en.ria.ru/russia/20130709/182150416/Russian-Wikipedia-Faces-Ban-Due-to-Anti-Piracy-Law--Director.html

 I'm CC-ing the advocacy advisors mailing list because this lies within
 their area of expertise; when responding to this e-mail, please make
 sure to include both lists.

   -- Tomasz

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
 mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia in trouble /yet/ again

2013-07-09 Thread Fred Bauder
 On 07/09/2013 08:37 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
 How is that not theft that we are facilitating?

 Because theft, is to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner of
 it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the
 thing or of his property or interest in it.

 In some jurisdiction, linking to sites that play fast and loose with
 Copyright /may/, in certain circumstances, be facilitating copyright
 infringement.  It certainly isn't theft.

 (I am not saying the latter is okay -- but that calling copyright
 infringement theft is inflammatory rhetoric and intellectually
 dishonest, at best).

 -- Marc

Interesting notion that plain talk is inflammatory and dishonest. How
is deliberate copyright infringement is not theft? Why are we the
pirates' little helpers?

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia in trouble /yet/ again

2013-07-09 Thread Fred Bauder
 On 9 July 2013 23:46, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:

  Well, not wanting to wade into that pirates' little helpers
 snarkiness,
  but it takes 30 seconds from anywhere on the web to find a copyright
  violation. Maybe a bit longer if you have a slow connection.
 
  Risker

 True enough, but why are we one of the ways?

 Fred


 I've not had that experience on English Wikipedia, although I've never
 tried it on other projects.  Now, I can easily take just about any link
 anywhere on the web and find a copyvio within 2-3 clicks, and I'm pretty
 sure that would be true for links on Wikipedia too.  I suppose we could
 always ban external links, but I think it would be counterproductive for
 our projects and mission, and it wouldn't solve anyone's copyright
 issues.
 But please don't conflate links directly from Wikipedia to copyright
 violations (which is, I believe, expressly forbidden on all of our
 projects) and being able to get to copyright violations from links in
 Wikipedia.  The only way to prevent the latter is to ban all external
 links.

 Risker


I guess I view sites which host entertainment, as opposed to material
which contains knowledge, as different. So music or a movie seems
different from a newspaper article or a passage from a book which, at
least in my mind, seems more like fair use, but not, of course, how fair
use is actually defined by the courts.

So The Searchers, which is not entirely void of information, however
distorted, seems very different from a copied newspaper article which
might also imagine Monument Valley was in Texas.

Fred



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia in trouble /yet/ again

2013-07-09 Thread Fred Bauder

 - Original Message -
 From: Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net
 To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Sent: Wednesday, July 10, 2013 4:36 AM
 Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia in trouble /yet/ again


 On 07/09/2013 08:37 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
 How is that not theft that we are facilitating?

 Because theft, is to deprive, temporarily or absolutely, the owner
 of
 it, or a person who has a special property or interest in it, of the
 thing or of his property or interest in it.

 In some jurisdiction, linking to sites that play fast and loose with
 Copyright /may/, in certain circumstances, be facilitating copyright
 infringement.  It certainly isn't theft.

 (I am not saying the latter is okay -- but that calling copyright
 infringement theft is inflammatory rhetoric and intellectually
 dishonest, at best).

 -- Marc

 Interesting notion that plain talk is inflammatory and dishonest.
 How
 is deliberate copyright infringement is not theft? Why are we the
 pirates' little helpers?

 Fred

 I'm tired of having this argument in uk.legal, and I don't want to go
 through it all again here. The essence of theft is that property
 belonging
 to another is appropriated, i.e. the rights of the owner have been
 assumed
 by someone else. In the case of a copyright, however many illicit copies
 are
 made, the copyright remains intact and it would be illogical to say
 otherwise, because then there would come a number of copies beyond which
 the
 copyright would cease to exist, which is not the case. And that's without
 arguing the point of whether it is possible to form an intention to
 permanently deprive the owner of his copyright when doing so is in fact
 and
 in law impossible.

If you post a creative work on a website the purpose which is to share
files you have assumed the rights of the owner, one of which is to
determine the conditions which must be met to view or listen to the work.
The owner can give his work away to the world but not third parties.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [tangential] Why voting is evil

2013-07-01 Thread Fred Bauder
 Rick Falkvinge has been writing a book, Swarmwise, on how the Pirate
 Party organised. He's been posting it a chapter at a time to his blog.

 You know how Wikipedia/Wikimedia has (or had) the meme that voting is
 evil? This sets out why.


 http://falkvinge.net/2013/07/01/swarmwise-the-tactical-manual-to-changing-the-world-chapter-six/

 tl;dr: voting creates winners and losers, and losers are unhappy and
 disengage.


 - d.

And what is the difference when any Wikipedian with good sense avoids
participation in any policy discussion unless there is massive consensus.
Practical experience with anarchic decision-making shows that aggressive
idiots rule.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Tapping into the Backbone

2013-06-22 Thread Fred Bauder
 Can you please stop spamming Us With topics like this? Its not Wikimedia
 related at all.

 Huib

It is related. There was a question as to whether edits and other
activity on Wikipedia were being swept up. Obviously they are. Whether
activities of interest to intelligence agencies are logged or ever used
or how is another matter.

Fred

 Op zaterdag 22 juni 2013 schreef Fred Bauder (fredb...@fairpoint.net) het
 volgende:

 The GCHQ mass tapping operation has been built up over five years by
 attaching intercept probes to transatlantic fibre-optic cables where
 they
 land on British shores carrying data to western Europe from telephone
 exchanges and internet servers in north America.

 This was done under secret agreements with commercial companies,
 described in one document as intercept partners.


 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/21/gchq-cables-secret-world-communications-nsa

 Fred




 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



 --
 Met vriendelijke groet,

 Huib Laurens




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] Tapping into the Backbone

2013-06-22 Thread Fred Bauder
In our earlier discussion about PRISM. Whether the intelligence agencies
could, if they felt it within their remit, access edits and other
actions, and, of course, passwords. Obviously they can easily if they are
not encrypted. Common sense, on the other hand will inform you that
nothing we do would be of interest to an intelligence agencies focused on
actual threats.

Fred

 Where is that question in this topic?

 Huib

 Op zaterdag 22 juni 2013 schreef Fred Bauder (fredb...@fairpoint.net) het
 volgende:

  Can you please stop spamming Us With topics like this? Its not
 Wikimedia
  related at all.
 
  Huib

 It is related. There was a question as to whether edits and other
 activity on Wikipedia were being swept up. Obviously they are. Whether
 activities of interest to intelligence agencies are logged or ever used
 or how is another matter.

 Fred

  Op zaterdag 22 juni 2013 schreef Fred Bauder
 (fredb...@fairpoint.netjavascript:;)
 het
  volgende:
 
  The GCHQ mass tapping operation has been built up over five years
 by
  attaching intercept probes to transatlantic fibre-optic cables where
  they
  land on British shores carrying data to western Europe from
 telephone
  exchanges and internet servers in north America.
 
  This was done under secret agreements with commercial companies,
  described in one document as intercept partners.
 
 
 
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jun/21/gchq-cables-secret-world-communications-nsa
 
  Fred
 
 
 
 
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; javascript:;
  Unsubscribe:
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
 
 
 
  --
  Met vriendelijke groet,
 
  Huib Laurens
 



 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:;
 Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l



 --
 Met vriendelijke groet,

 Huib Laurens




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

2013-06-15 Thread Fred Bauder
 On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Andy Mabbett
 a...@pigsonthewing.org.ukwrote:

  PRISM

 From @ShammaBoyarin on Twitter: Its not as if the NSA were mass
 downloading articles from JSTOR.


 Certainly if the evidence showed that the NSA were breaking into wiring
 closets and hacking into computer networks this would be a much different
 story.

 (Yes, you can speculate that they're probably doing this too, but this
 particular scandal is the NSA getting information from computer networks
 with the permission of the computer owners, not despite the owners
 actively
 trying to keep them out.)

Actually, there is a small attached CIA unit to do just that. The story
is a bit bigger than what The Guardian has published so far.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] PRISM

2013-06-15 Thread Fred Bauder
 On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Fred Bauder
 fredb...@fairpoint.netwrote:

  (Yes, you can speculate that they're probably doing this too, but
 this
  particular scandal is the NSA getting information from computer
 networks
  with the permission of the computer owners, not despite the owners
  actively
  trying to keep them out.)

 Actually, there is a small attached CIA unit to do just that. The story
 is a bit bigger than what The Guardian has published so far.


 Did you read what I said?  Yes, you can speculate that that's what
 they're
 doing.  But that's not what was published.

 The fact of the matter is that there would be a much bigger uproar if the
 NSA were caught doing what Aaron Swartz did, on American soil against an
 innocent American company.  If NSA were caught breaking into wiring
 closets
 and hacking into computer networks, the 4th Amendment violation would be
 way more obvious and incontrovertible.


Within the United States the FBI, has the authority, in appropriate
cases, with a warrant, to engage in such activity. If there was a valid
finding by a Federal District Court judge that the was a valid reason it
would not be a 4th amendment violation. There is more than one source,
not just what happens to be on the front page this week. Additionally, we
are not bound by the canon of generally accepted knowledge in our
discussions. That is our rule for encyclopedia articles, not our rules
for thinking.

Fred



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] PRISM, government surveillance, and Wikimedia: Request for community feedback

2013-06-15 Thread Fred Bauder
 The reporting in the UK is that it is aimed at 'foreigners'. I think that
 is us! Of course that may be for domestic US consumption.

Yes, the thing is, we are an international organization, and, frankly, we
don't vet people politically before they can create an account or edit.
Our trust system is based on their behavior here, not what else they may
be doing in their life. It is inevitable that from time to time we may be
in communication with people that are out of favor with the United States
government. However, I think that is so rare that neither American
intelligence services nor us should waste much time on it. There is a
vanishingly small chance that a request might be directed to us. I doubt
expending hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting such a request is the
best use of our money, but consensus may be different. It is pretty cheap
putting on a brave face when there is little actual danger.

Fred


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


[Wikimedia-l] [Fwd: You've been sent an invitation to read content on GovInfoSecurity.com]

2013-06-14 Thread Fred Bauder
--- Original Message 
Subject: You've been sent an invitation to read content on
GovInfoSecurity.com
From:ad...@govinfosecurity.com
Date:Fri, June 14, 2013 2:57 pm
To:  fredb...@fairpoint.net
-

Fred Bauder has requested you read content on GovInfoSecurity.com:

Comments:

Title: IT Tools Available to Stop NSA-Type Leaks
Link:
http://www.govinfosecurity.com/tools-available-to-stop-nsa-type-leaks-a-5826

Thank You,

GovInfoSecurity.com Admin Team



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


  1   2   >