Re: [Wikimedia-l] Non-renewal of Wikimedia UK fundraiser agreement

2014-05-21 Thread Hubert Laska

Am 21.05.2014 15:33, schrieb MZMcBride:
To that end, on the subject of outside observers and open letters: 
when writing such a letter, it's important to give context and err on 
the side of formality. I've never seen a professional letter begin 
with Dear Sue (no last name or contact information provided) and end 
with Yours sincerely, Jon (no last name or contact information 
provided). This isn't a huge deal, but it's perhaps indicative


Dear Sir!

 ??? With all due respect, but what kind of bullshit is this??

sincerely H.

Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How Wikimedia could help languages to survive

2014-04-20 Thread Hubert Laska
Hi Milos, at the same time when you are concerned about the collection / 
preservation of thousands of languages, I will briefly introduce a 
project that currently takes place in Austria together with the Austrian 
Academy of Sciences. This project has the same goal direction, which you 
mention, even if we might go another way. Our way is at first the 
acquisition of languages, micro languages​​, language varieties and 

The basis of this work it will be, by a software (which has yet to be 
made​ ​) to capture the regional characteristics of the language. 
written as a word, as a phrase, and then of course the regional 
peculiarities in pronunciation, using and producing audio files. 
Subsequently, there will be regional wikis to bring on a simple level, 
people to represent their knowledge. This is important especially in the 
german Wikipedia, because now it is almost impossible to enter de:WP as 
a freshman. The claims are completely covered, we lose an enormous 
number of authors and win hardly newones.

In the meantime, it is already partially so that even the articles are 
no longer readable because they just follow an off-hook academic claim, 
not the demands of most of our readers.

You are speaking about languages, Milos​ ​, of which you accept that it 
is as a official standard language with an appropriate written version. 
Here you will (and we will) encounter the first boundaries.

The most important part for me of your writing is that you're worried 
about the fact that we constantly lose authors. So you're absolutely 
right. In our projects we often ignore the fact that knowledge is not 
necessarily a knowledge of the educated class alone, we find knowledge 
even in places where you least expect it. Currently it is so that access 
to Wikipedia, especially in the developed versions with 100,000 
articles, already excludes many people to participate. The challenge is 
simply too difficult.

Language does not stand alonefor itself, language is strongly tied to 
the culture. And this culture is often - I am referring to the 
German-language Wikipedia - already in a kind of elitist form of us even 
reproduced and filtered.

But why should a language and word-collecting software make it possible 
to attract new authors and to enable new areas of knowledge acquisition? 
By being brave and just go new ways!Wikipedia is 13 years old and has 
not changed in its basic concept. But this basic concept is, in my view, 
in many ways no more purposeful in order to meet the requirements for 
different classes of readers and writers.

Though I know that language does not stands on its own, so I also know 
that culture is not just a part of everyday life of humans, the life is 
the culture itself. But this isoften perceived by the elitists not as 
culture but as folklore. Just as we perceive dialects as a language of 
the subordinate social classes and as such also denote such languages ​ 
as dialectsso that the apparent superiority of a so-called high-level 
language can be brought to the fore.

When we talk about knowledge, then we always talk about written 
knowledge in a standardized form.

However, we lose a large part of the knowledge by the fact that our 
culture is changing , our tools, our traditional professions. But that 
also disappears the diversity of our culture.

If you look at the tools of a cobbler, then you will find there a piece 
of steel which is called in german Kneip. It is for the shoemaker, the 
most important of all tools in addition to the hammer. Today we no 
longer findshoemakers. Until a few years ago there were shoemakers in 
every street, in every small town. Probably in serbia or Belgrade, you 
will find more than we have here in Vienna, Austria and Germany 
together. And because this piece of steel , Kneip, wich is so extremely 
efficient and above all extremely cheap, it was formerly in every 
private toolbox. Together with a grindstone .

Today it is called the Stanley knife, but it can not compete at least 
with the quality of Kneip. But we still have the word Kneip. And as long 
this word exists and people know what it means, as long this tool 
exists. If only in our consciousness. But when the word disappears , 
then the tool is finally gone. And thus also a part of our culture.

This is just a small example of how important it is to preserve the 
language in its diverse form.

The same applies to languages. Each language is significant because it 
is originated in and out of a very special cultural situation. If this 
culture could retain without influence from outside, eventually it will 
become a own language,because it is different from the more changing 
main language.

If you understand Yiddish - which is understood as a separate language - 
then you know about how people may have spoken German several hundred 
years ago. Although, of course, Yiddish has also evolved. And even the 
main spoken language in Vienna, wich is in parts 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How Wikimedia could help languages to survive

2014-04-20 Thread Hubert Laska

Am 20.04.2014 08:38, schrieb geni:

On 20 April 2014 04:46, Milos Rancic wrote:

I'd say that Scots Gaelic could be a good test (Wikimedia UK help
needed!). It's a language with ~70k of speakers and if it's possible
to achieve 100 active editors per month, we could say that it could
somehow work in other cases, as well.

Err they are about to have a referendum on independence

What do you want to say with that? That it is thus no longer necessary, 
gaelic to lead as an example? Wikipedia does´nt end at national borders!


Wikimedia-l mailing list

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

2014-04-07 Thread Hubert Laska
With all due respect, Gerard, not the bearer ofthe message, Tomas, is 
the problem, the problem arises where there are people who can make 
decisions with far-reaching consequences - and be selected for it - but 
then assume one for me unacceptable position against that group whose 
services are the basis for their own position.

Fuck the Community, who cares, was not the only thing, much worse for me 
is the meaning, that free knowledge is easier to buy than to get by 
edits and edits.

Of whose money? By those who make one edit after the other? Taking 
photos, one after another and upload them?

I know Steffen good enough and I know, that he is able to tell apart 
explanations which happens within an special group dynamic process. If 
this has occured, he would not have written this in his blog.

Am 07.04.2014 12:52, schrieb Gerard Meijssen:

What is it that you intend to do. Hang them and, hang them high??

You already know that it was in a very emotional moment ...

What is your objective? What do you expect as a result and how will that be
in everyone's benefit??

On 7 April 2014 12:16, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote:

Ziko van Dijk wrote

  I think that a single quote by a unnamed female Wikimedian, said in

public or in private, is a very small basis for any substantiate

Thanks to Chris e-mail's, we now know that the comment was made during a
public session (though I can't find the relevant section in the minutes on

That the identity of the person is currently unknown is due to the fact
that it has not been revealed by other participants in that workshop; I'm
sure Chris, and Steffen, and other people know very well who that person is.

I'm used to the secrecy, but I find it deeply disturbing that such a
comment could have been made during a public workshop in passing;
however, it would fit perfectly in the alleged divisions between some
chapters and their respective communities.

Where the idea that a single entity (here: a chapter) knows better what's
best for a community than the community does itself come from, I'm not sure.


Wikimedia-l mailing list

Wikimedia-l mailing list

Wikimedia-l mailing list