I took a look at Vikidia, thought I could do something for them, signed up with
an account, read what I could find of the guidance, and created an article on
Underwater diving, following the rules as I understood them, using properly
attributed CC-by-sa content from Simple English Wikipedia as
Yes, I find it more difficult to write for Simple English, because it
(Simple English) is not my first language and I do not think in it, and the
words I would normally use for the topics I prefer are not invented there
and have to be worked around, so it is translation a lot of the time. There
is
the bulk of the editors speak also a major
language which is used like lingua franca (like Russian for the Chuvash
Wikipedia, or perhaps Spanish for the Quechua Wikipedia). This makes the
problem less acute.
Best
Yaroslav
On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 8:44 PM Peter Southwood
wrote:
Interesting
Interesting research. Maybe I just missed it, but I didn’t notice any
discussion of relation of availability of reliable sources to coverage in
different languages. In English Wikipedia we are not allowed to write about
topics which are not covered by suitable sources, but there may also be
isetti_interview:_most_of_the_money_is_flowing_into_the_Global_South>
.
Thank you,
Megan
On Thu, Jun 2, 2022 at 6:52 PM Peter Southwood
wrote:
This seems a reasonable request.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Andreas Kolbe [mailto:jayen...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 June 2022 15:13
To: Wi
This seems a reasonable request.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Andreas Kolbe [mailto:jayen...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 June 2022 15:13
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Fact-checking Raju Narisetti in the Indian Express
Dear all,
Last weekend, an interview with Raju Narisetti,
Which may never happen. Cheers, Peter
-Original Message-
From: suvratjai...@gmail.com [mailto:suvratjai...@gmail.com]
Sent: 18 May 2022 06:30
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] To make apodictic articles
We have to complete all stub articles in wikipedia.
+1
P
From: Samuel Klein [mailto:meta...@gmail.com]
Sent: 18 May 2022 22:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Simplifying governance processes
Dear Board (and all),
The growing complexity of governance efforts is defeating us. Process creep
amp;_r=0
Sent with ProtonMail secure email.
--- Original Message ---
On Friday, May 6th, 2022 at 7:25 AM, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> In what way is "diverse people" offensive, and to whom? Cheers, Peter.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [ma
How do you propose that relevant competencies be recognized, defined, or
assessed? Cheers, Peter
-Original Message-
From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2022 15:52
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re:
In what way is "diverse people" offensive, and to whom? Cheers, Peter.
-Original Message-
From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
Sent: 04 May 2022 16:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Are you considering running for the
And who will do all this tedious work? Cheers, Peter
From: g...@tiscali.it [mailto:g...@tiscali.it]
Sent: 01 May 2022 20:01
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Open proxies and IP blocking
Another somewhat obvious solution: instead, or before, of blocking, make the
I am encouraged that it is as many as 27000, How was this number calculated?
Cheers, Peter (one of the 27000)
From: Felix Nartey [mailto:fnar...@wikimedia.org]
Sent: 29 April 2022 15:05
To: Mailing list for African Wikimedians
Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List; Shupai Mchuchu;
:14 AM Peter Southwood
wrote:
This question has been asked before, and so far no workable answer has been
suggested. Cheers, Peter.
From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
Sent: 20 April 2022 19:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l
This question has been asked before, and so far no workable answer has been
suggested. Cheers, Peter.
From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
Sent: 20 April 2022 19:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Next steps: Universal Code
“the block message only shows up when I try to save the page”
That is just inexcusable. Symbolic of complete indifference to other people’s
time wasted. Why would a new editor treated like this ever bother to try again?
Block message with explanation and alternatives (with links) should come
This question has been asked before, and I have never seen a reasonably
practicable proposal for managing the problem. Cheers, Peter
From: H4CUSEG via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
Sent: 20 April 2022 19:44
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc: H4CUSEG
Subject: [Wikimedia-l]
I used to use it, but then it broke so I stopped using it. Just one of the
things that died out because no-one could be bothered to maintain it. Cheers,
Peter
From: Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga [mailto:galder...@hotmail.com]
Sent: 17 April 2022 17:47
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject:
ese, Russian, Arabic, Spanish, French and English can be
categorized as hegemonic.
Kind regards,
Nattes
Le 13 avr. 2022 à 10:24, Peter Southwood a écrit
:
Hi Remy,
It might help if you defined what you mean by a non-hegemonic language. I would
not think it a term familiar to
Hi Remy,
It might help if you defined what you mean by a non-hegemonic language. I would
not think it a term familiar to most readers, and it is poorly covered by a
google search.
Cheers,
Peter
From: GERBET Remy via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
Sent: 12 April 2022
I sympathise with a lot of what you say, but do you have a workable alternative
to reliable sources as currently defined? Peter
From: Frederick Noronha [mailto:fredericknoro...@gmail.com]
Sent: 11 April 2022 21:19
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] An Open Letter to Maryana
, Peter
From: Benjamin Lees [mailto:emufarm...@gmail.com]
Sent: 12 April 2022 10:36
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Open letter on negating race and ethnicity as
"meaningful distinctions" in the UCoC
On Mon, Apr 11, 2022 at 1:06 AM Peter Southwood
wrote:
D
Definitions of terminology makes sense in any document that is intended as an
enforceable guide to behavior. Without them, whose definition applies? Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Lane Chance [mailto:zinkl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, April 9, 2022 11:17
To: Wikimedia Mailing
Yes, that is what we are supposed to do and supposed to be good at. Cheers,
Peter
From: Ilario Valdelli [mailto:valde...@gmail.com]
Sent: 02 March 2022 10:31
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Sanctions against the Russian Federation; support
for Ukrainian Wikimedians
Good points, these. I hope someone will answer them.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Inductiveload [mailto:inductivel...@gmail.com]
Sent: 26 January 2022 02:36
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Seeking community recommendations for Equity Fund
grantees
On 25
If the reason for deletion was to suppress undesirable content, why would one
want part of it to remain viewable? Cheers, Peter
From: Vi to [mailto:vituzzu.w...@gmail.com]
Sent: 17 January 2022 23:45
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: "content was" when deleting pages - is
“until a couple months ago, we didn't have backups for the media files”
How is that even possible?
Cheers, Peter
From: Amir Sarabadani [mailto:ladsgr...@gmail.com]
Sent: 01 January 2022 08:42
To: Wikitech-l
Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List; Wikimedia Commons Discussion List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l]
Is the community wishlist not for for projects run by volunteers? Volunteers do
what they choose, employees do what they are paid for. Keeping the Wikis
functional should be the work of employees and the WMF.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Gnangarra [mailto:gnanga...@gmail.com]
Sent: 29 December
Fair comment. If you want to keep editors, make sure they have functioning
tools. Is this not one of the reasons WMF was originally formed?
Cheers,
Peter
From: DerHexer via Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
Sent: 29 December 2021 12:11
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Cc:
Mailing List
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Auction at
Christie's
On Mon, 6 Dec 2021 at 07:36, Peter Southwood
wrote:
>
> Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Quite. As Jimmy notes in the WP:AN discussion which has already been linked to:
I was inst
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Cheers,
P
From: Adam Wight [mailto:adam.m.wi...@gmail.com]
Sent: 03 December 2021 17:32
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: Auction at Christie's
This is a good opportunity for us to take a look at the new
Fair comment.
P
-Original Message-
From: nosebagb...@gmail.com [mailto:nosebagb...@gmail.com]
Sent: 27 November 2021 13:04
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: Closing the comment period for
the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Draft
This is a strong argument for CC-by-sa whenever possible to push for
verifiability and traceability. The credit is secondary, almost irrelevant
compared to being able to track down the origins.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Andreas Kolbe [mailto:jayen...@gmail.com]
Sent: 25 November 2021 14:52
To:
Seems a reasonable idea. Cheers, Peter
From: Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l
[mailto:wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org]
Sent: 09 November 2021 14:16
To: 'Wikimedia Mailing List'
Cc: Alessandro Marchetti
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: Small gratitude to our fellow
wikimedians
I think perhaps you attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained
by incompetence.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Todd Allen [mailto:toddmal...@gmail.com]
Sent: 28 September 2021 10:01
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Marketing Mail] [Wikimedia-l] Re: About raising money
It's
Are these “facts of the matter” available for evidence focused rational
consideration?
Cheers,
Peter
From: Mike Godwin [mailto:mnemo...@gmail.com]
Sent: 30 August 2021 02:30
To: Andreas Kolbe
Cc: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikipedia issues in UNDARK.org #Opinion
mmons" are fundamental. As it is, this is not even
considered.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Tue, 17 Aug 2021 at 08:46, Peter Southwood
wrote:
And it is based on a fundamental misconception of the legally mandated role of
the WMF. Everything based on this false premise, fails.
Chee
And it is based on a fundamental misconception of the legally mandated role of
the WMF. Everything based on this false premise, fails.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Željko Blaće [mailto:zbl...@mi2.hr]
Sent: 17 August 2021 06:18
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia issues in
The problem is which political opinions would be acceptable on a user page, and
who gets to decide this. We are expected to edit neutrally, so expressing a
political opinion on a user page could be considered a declaration of
partisanship which could extend to editing behaviour.
Cheers,
Is all this stuff somewhere on Meta?
From: Isaac Olatunde [mailto:reachout2is...@gmail.com]
Sent: 17 May 2021 01:07
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Affiliations Committee Call for Candidates - June
2021
To add to Risker's question, which subcommittee is responsible
In what way would this clarify anything? Common sense is not so common, and
sometimes is not even rational. Reasonable person at least provides some
conditions for testing, though is also clearly not very useful in a
multicultural environment.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Wikimedia-l
If things are as bad as that then there should be and might already be an
offshore backup, possibly more than one, as it is a no-brainer, and I don’t
think WMF tech management and the board are stupid, and nor are those who
would wish to prevent it from happening. But plausible deniability.
Good points.
Are these maybe covered in a future stage of the project?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Samuel Klein
Sent: 26 September 2020 19:26
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l]
Unfortunately I think all these points are valid. These behavious do not
improve communication for many of us. There seems to be a choice between
freedom of expression and effective communication in a multicultural group.
There is theoretically the option of asking for clarification, but it is
This is the point I was working on. I also have no confident answer to this
problem, but have a gut feel it is somewhere in between the extremes. There is
also the point that most people have some choice in where they live, though I
do not have any useful suggestion of how that should be
tter? When measuring
internal equity, do we measure based on how expensive of a lifestyle each
employee leads?
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020, 7:46 AM Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Should they? Their cost of living expenses may vary considerably.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
There was no clear statement of "this is the problematic text and this is why
it is considered unacceptable", which is a thing that I consider a reasonable
expectation, as it is possible to learn from it, understand it, pass
constructive criticism or agreement, and use as it a precedent for
Should they? Their cost of living expenses may vary considerably.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Nathan
Sent: 11 September 2020 13:39
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation and
I would call this fair comment, and parallels can be drawn between how the UCoC
may be used and the current discussion. Without clear statement on why a
decision is made it cannot be properly understood, accepted or improved, and we
end up in the usual spiral of speculation, accusation and bad
he broader audience.
Happily, this is something more than 99 percent of subscribers manage to do
without effort.
As I have repeatedly clarified, respectful discourse absolutely does not
preclude criticism. Indeed, it is liable to make the criticism more likely
to be heard.
A.
On Fri, 11 Sep 2020, 1
Is there somewhere we can refer to the list of offensive and unacceptable
expressions, and how they are determined?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Anders Wennersten
Sent: 11 September 2020 10:33
To:
It is not yet clear that the use of the words "fart" or "flatulence" are the
actual issue. Context matters, but we do not know the full context yet, as the
reasons have not been explained, leaving us with little option but to
speculate. We are experiencing a failure of communication as much, or
Good luck to all of you
P
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Rocío Consales
Sent: 10 September 2020 20:39
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] New board of Wikimedia Chile / Nuevo directorio de
18:19 Uhr schrieb Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>:
> Is the objection to the words he used or to the way he used them?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> Behalf
>
Is the objection to the words he used or to the way he used them?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Asaf Bartov
Sent: 09 September 2020 21:57
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Moderation notice
For a UVoC to be helpful, it would have to be sufficiently clear about what is
unacceptable, and why it is unacceptable, and would itself have to be
sufficiently clear and acceptable to be seen as fair by the communities who
would be bound by it. This is not easy to do, and the talk page
Anders, I think you are referring to jargon. I agree that it should be avoided
in the interests of clarity and ease of reliable translation.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Anders Wennersten
Sent: 10
the opportunity to be a
list administrator :D
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020 at 19:41, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Good judgement is often such a subjective thing, Everyone thinks they have
> it. A bit like the Dunning-Kruger effect.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
&
Are those things not already covered by the terms of use?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Amir Sarabadani
Sent: 10 September 2020 13:22
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] A Universal Code
misconduct, need not
apply.
A.
On Thu, 10 Sep 2020, 12:58 Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Asaf,
> What are the criteria for eligibility as moderator for this list?
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikim
Asaf,
What are the criteria for eligibility as moderator for this list?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Asaf Bartov
Sent: 10 September 2020 11:07
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l]
Is there a record somewhere of what unacceptable language was used and
against what standard it was judged to be unacceptable?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Asaf Bartov
Sent: 09 September 2020 21:57
To:
Maybe you could take on an official historian.
Cheers,
P
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Delphine Ménard
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 19:06
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Institutional memory @
This is the sort of information that should be in the official history.
Cheers,
P
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
Of Pete Forsyth
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2020 22:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l]
always feel free to let us know of other ideas to improve the
process for community feedback gathering!
Best regards,
Christel
Christel Steigenberger (she/her)
Trust and Safety Specialist
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 8:44 PM Peter Sou
Hi Christel
I am glad to hear that, and I hope that proper consultation will occur with all
potentially affected parties, in places where they can comment and point out
problems on user friendly or at least familiar software, over at least a
reasonably representative range of languages, and
for participation
Hoi,
So what is your alternative, what do you have as an alternative?
Thanks,
GerardM
On Thu, 30 Jul 2020 at 20:24, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Hi Christel,
> I wish the committee well, and success in coming up with a workable
> policy. This is fine as long as no a
Hi Christel,
I wish the committee well, and success in coming up with a workable policy.
This is fine as long as no assumption is made that these people represent the
communities in any way other than for themselves. They may be fine people and
may even have excellent ideas and skills suited to
Could even be that no-one has gotten around to writing any policies and
guidance, and everyone is just winging it with very little oversight. How
could we know?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Dennis
List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system
Hoi,
How can OTRS be part of Wikipedia, it is there for any and all projects.
Thanks,
GerardM
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 10:48, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Context is necessary to understand this.
> If OTRS part of Wik
Seems to me that if someone does not specify a motivation, we leave it as that
- no motivation. It you want to know what it is, you ask. You may get an
answer, but sometimes it is not particularly relevant, as the question may be
worth asking for whatever reason because the answer could be
List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Operation and oversight of OTRS system
On Sat, 11 Jul 2020 at 10:48, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Context is necessary to understand this.
> If OTRS part of Wikipedia?
I don't understand that question.
The cited answer was received from .
If not, Which ANI?
>
Context is necessary to understand this.
If OTRS part of Wikipedia? If not, Which ANI?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Aron Manning
Sent: 11 July 2020 09:23
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re:
If it was just a matter of money to keep the servers running, I would say yes,
but if they have no editors there would not be a lot of point. We could offer
an archive, and assimilation.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
it seems this problem is localised on
our Africa based users?
Regards
Seddon
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:05 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> I get this:
>
> The connection has timed out
>
> The server at en.wikipedia.org is taking too long to resp
, Jun 29, 2020 at 3:24 PM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Peter
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>
Is anyone else unable to get through to the Wikimedia servers?
Cheers,
Peter
___
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:
Dunning and Kruger identified the effect, unfortunately they did not identify a
cure.
Cheers,
P
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 29 June 2020 12:36
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re:
So far it has been an ongoing process. No obvious reason to expect a change.
Cheers,
P
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Dan Szymborski
Sent: 28 June 2020 18:13
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board
It is not methodologically sound to continue using a survey which is unfit for
purpose, regardless of how many people have responded. It is ethically
questionable to continue using a survey which simply does not allow for the
possibility of being completely wrong when this possibility has been
That is a really poorly designed survey unless it has been changed since I last
saw it.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Zack McCune
Sent: 27 June 2020 02:37
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re:
Of course not, we have a strong bias in favour of freedom of information,
accuracy, and verifiability to reliable sources. Also, officially, civil
discourse and decision by consensus. It is written into our basic policies
(speaking as an en: Wikipedian, other projects may differ). Most policy
The entertainment industry has more influential lobbyists?
P
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
James Salsman
Sent: 20 April 2020 23:40
To: Wikimedia Mailing List; Yaroslav Blanter
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on
One of the advantages of this project is that the best of each Wikipedia can be
used, allowing smaller Wikipedias to concentrate on topics of local interest
and importance which are not in the other language wikipedias, and these can be
used in the major wikipedias, expanding their diversity if
I agree. It did not seem to say anything much.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Fæ
Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2020 3:06 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Summary of the Brand Project
A very interesting proposal for a new wiki by Denny Vrandečić at
https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.04733 (What's making me happy this week)
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Pine W
Sent: 15 April 2020 08:36
To:
Based on my first read-through of the paper, I think this would be something
worth doing.
Cheers,
Peter.
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Denny Vrandecic
Sent: 14 April 2020 02:53
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject:
; > > untiil thats taken place.It's like asking the fox to rebuild
> the
> > > hen
> > > > > house, I just dont see how I could support anything they
> recommend.
> > > > >
> > > > > After the dollars, and t=volunteer time that has been pumped int
about Wikimedia for the last 15 years
[1] and I learned that documentation may be relevant but it is unlikely to
make people see what is in front of them.
Thanks,
GerardM
[1] https://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 11:16, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> It is grossly unrealis
its positive *and* negative
benefits. Often the negative benefits seem to outweigh the positive,
unfortunately.
Aron
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 11:17, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> It is grossly unrealistic to blame English Wikipedia and its editing
> community for what you appear to co
On Sun, 15 Mar 2020 at 06:19, Peter Southwood
wrote:
> Gerard, You start off by correctly specifying that Wikipedia is about 300
> projects and make several good points about how people confuse Wikipedia
> with English Wikipedia, how this bias adversely affects various other
&
Gerard, You start off by correctly specifying that Wikipedia is about 300
projects and make several good points about how people confuse Wikipedia with
English Wikipedia, how this bias adversely affects various other projects, and
then claim that "Wikipedia" is "universally understood to be
I put a reply on the "What does free knowledge mean to you" questionnaire, but
it did not turn up on the list below the edit box. Is the set of published
replies being censored or cherry-picked to remove anything that someone does
not like?
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From:
Perhaps you do, but do the volunteer communities of the projects you would like
to rename share this enthusiasm?
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Dennis During
Sent: 14 March 2020 00:20
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
I would agree with this in principle. From what I have seen so far, it looks
like either Snøhetta have not done their homework on how we operate, or they
have the arrogance of PR agencies, don't care, and plan to spin their way
through with smoke and mirrors, flashy pages with lots of buzz,
I am not getting your point here. Could you try to explain more clearly. It
would help if you used the correct words, or if you are do not know them, give
the equivalent in your own language so we can get a meaningful translation. It
is not even clear which Wikipedia you are complaining about.
Also, overworked groups with large backlogs struggling to maintain high quality
tend to have less patience with the inexperienced and not-yet-competent than we
might like. It is also possible that some of the workers in those groups are
not as competent as we would like them to be, but at those
This does seem unreasonable. Do they have an explanation at Commons?
This is happening without standardising in one label Wikipedia, so it is
jumping to quite a conclusion to assume that the issue is related.
For the record, I am also opposed to rebranding to Wikipedia, but I do not
think this
I think I agree with this.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Gerard Meijssen
Sent: 21 February 2020 15:50
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Next steps on Wikimedia Space
Hoi,
There are too
Agree about the 3 features, have not given sufficient though to the rest yet to
comment.
Cheers,
Peter
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Aron Manning
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2020 4:04 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
1 - 100 of 478 matches
Mail list logo
