Re: [Wikimedia-l] Donating to Wikipedia

2019-12-18 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
This discussion comes back every year. Every year we get the same reassurance that it's being looked into, that we'll try to do better, that things have been tested, etc. The reality of the matter is that the alarmist and misleading stuff *works*. And that it's most probably not going anywhere.

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

2019-07-05 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
This is sarcasm, right? Right? On Fri, 5 Jul 2019, 12:16 Todd Allen, wrote: > Well, inclusionism generally is toxic. It lets a huge volume of garbage > pile up. Deletionism just takes out the trash. We did it with damn Pokemon, > and we'll eventually do it with junk football "biographies", with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New board for Wikimedia Belgium + evaluation behaviour WMF

2019-06-17 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 16:12, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: >If there are rumors about physical violence, unbelievable as they may seem, >the bottom line common sense is to approach the alleged would-be attacker and >request politely that they stay away, to deescalate even just a potentially tense

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Use of Wikimedia projects for anti-LGBT+ "humour"

2019-03-03 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
I don't understand in which possible world anyone thought this was a good idea. The MfD, that is. It, and the entire discussion in favour, reads as some sort of caricature of the worst SJW-type excesses. M. On Sun, 3 Mar 2019 at 16:41, Fæ wrote: > As the last second repost had the same

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Israel joins the nationwide strike to protest the exclusion of gay couples the right to become parents

2018-07-22 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
+1 On 22 July 2018 at 10:02, Andrea Zanni wrote: > Hi all, > I'll ask forgiveness in advance for starting a probable flame. > > I support WMIL stance: equity is absolutely within our Wikimedia > values, and supporting LGBTQ rights is always a good thing. > > But I cannot help but see the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Airtasker adds for articles

2018-05-24 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Shouldn't articles be judged independently of who exactly wrote them and for what reason? If an article reads well, has good content, is sourced, neutral etc, what's the issue exactly? On 24 May 2018 at 12:28, Gnangarra wrote: > I find this rather disturbing that Airtasker

Re: [Wikimedia-l] LGBT+ safety considerations for conference venues

2016-11-10 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
+1 On 10 November 2016 at 09:00, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > You do not get it. Wikimania is first and foremost about spreading the word > about what we do and who we are. > > I have read Pax's original post. He did not go to Wikimania. He asks for > consideration

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The end

2016-05-17 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Welcome to my exact experience on Dutch Wikipedia. Banned for life for 'outing' a power user. The 'outing' is in huge inverted commas -- (1) enter her on-wiki username in any search engine and you get oodles of vanity page(s) with her full name and (2) she'd done much worse than that to me. I've

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

2016-05-08 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
I would venture quite a bit more than 'eight people' are annoyed by the constant and blatant double standard. And oh, I now anticipate a patronizing mail that starts with 'Hoi,' and ends with 'Thanks' -- it's not just 'the same eight people' that keep repeating their position ad nauseam. On 8

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Account of the events leading to James Heilman's removal

2016-05-02 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Just to be sure I understand the issue: staff members reached out specifically to the four of you and asked for confidentiality, and then the Board demanded 'all documents', presumably including some confidential staff information, and James only very reluctantly shared it? Michel On 2 May 2016

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: A conversation?

2016-03-10 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
...this is about that mail of yours to James that was going to be published, right? On 10 March 2016 at 11:01, jimmy wales wrote: > > > Indeed George I agree with everything you have said about the internal > effects of lack of transparency and openness. Assuming I and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Simple English please! was The conversation is happening elsewhere :(

2016-02-17 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Aspen grove: https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Pando_(tree) On 17 February 2016 at 10:14, Anders Wennersten wrote: > I second this opinion, please remember we are many not having English as > our mother language > > Also besides being all lost in the discussion of Knight

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Can we see the Knight grant application and grant offer?

2016-02-12 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Gerard, I was waiting for this mail. For me personally, your complaining is achieving exactly the opposite of what you think. It sounds as if you'd much rather prefer to stick your head in the sand and hope things will blow over. "Move along, nothing to see here -- oh look! something positive

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

2015-01-08 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Yes. Finally, a voice of reason. On 8 January 2015 at 08:07, 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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banners (again)

2014-12-05 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
A slight tangent: I did a quick Google search to try and refresh my memory about the Wikipedia Forever thing, and these were the results: http://imgur.com/7AU8kTp. I think it's more than worrying that many of the results have the fundraising message as a summary. Cheers, Michel On 4 December

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Issue on Dutch Wikipedia in relation to BLP violating images

2014-11-28 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Quick and easy: don't bother with the Dutch Wikipedia. It is one of the more toxic environments on the internet. :) On 28 November 2014 at 14:47, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: It is with some degree of sadness that I have to bring this to wikimedia-l, but it's something that has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)

2014-01-10 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
On 10 January 2014 20:12, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.comwrote: I very much agree with this. Currently we just don't have the manpower to explain to 'the corporate world' in an understanding and clear fashion that what they are trying to do is *all wrong*, and what it is they *can*

[Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia redefined -- typography and UX and such

2012-08-07 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
Well, it's certainly a possible starting point for discussion: http://www.wikipediaredefined.com/ -- Michel Vuijlsteke http://blog.zog.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apparently, Wikipedia is ugly

2012-07-25 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
On 25 July 2012 22:04, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: On 25 July 2012 21:01, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: (This is why I'm so disappointed the mobile app doesn't do editing, for example. Or, indeed, some way to take a photo and quickly add it to an article.)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apparently, Wikipedia is ugly

2012-07-14 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
want to edit our articles. I don't believe you actually said this. Michel Vuijlsteke ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apparently, Wikipedia is ugly

2012-07-14 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
On 14 July 2012 23:48, David Richfield davidrichfi...@gmail.com wrote: I really really don't get all this talk about Wikipedia being ugly. To me it's a great example of how text really can move from markup to a well-laid-out website with a coherent design philosophy. Wikipedia generates

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Apparently, Wikipedia is ugly

2012-07-14 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
would not have hundreds of text hyperlinks, but would show off its new images. On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:42 PM, Michel Vuijlsteke wikipe...@zog.org wrote: On 14 July 2012 23:48, David Richfield davidrichfi...@gmail.com wrote: I really really don't get all this talk about

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FSF Blocked by MS Net nanny software

2012-06-25 Thread Michel Vuijlsteke
I didn't really mind it -- a fun reminder some people still live in the Micro$haft Winbl0ws 1990s. :) Michel On 25 June 2012 06:21, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote: And this has what to do with the Wikimedia-l List? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing