Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread John Erling Blad
Well, data becomes information becomes knowledge. Information imply organization of data, and knowledge imply processing of information. The description "knowledge communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance" is from a dictionary, and I won't tell which one. It is not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread Richard Farmbrough
Probably that is verifiability. On 11 Aug 2017 12:31, "Rogol Domedonfors" wrote: > I'm aware that "knowledge" as a concept has a long history. I would not > have expected the movement to have finally resolved the "problem of > knowledge", whatever that might be, nor did

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread Rogol Domedonfors
I'm aware that "knowledge" as a concept has a long history. I would not have expected the movement to have finally resolved the "problem of knowledge", whatever that might be, nor did I say that I had. I am expressing surprise that there is not yet a common understanding that the movement can

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread Richard Farmbrough
The problem of knowledge is much older than Wikipedia. It is part of the reason that so many intelligent people belive things that are "simply not so". On 11 Aug 2017 11:52, "Rogol Domedonfors" wrote: > Is it not rather late to be discussing what "knowledge" might be,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread Rogol Domedonfors
Is it not rather late to be discussing what "knowledge" might be, towards the end of the second decade of a mission to bring the sum of human knowledge to the world, and in the middle of a major effort to determine the strategy of the movement into its third and fourth decades? Surely by now

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread John Erling Blad
Information is "facts told, heard, or discovered" (Oxford) or "knowledge communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance". (I would say data and not knowledge, but knowledge is good enough for this.) If you can't observe the fact or circumstance, and can't communicate the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread John Erling Blad
No, _verifiability_ can't be different, but _acceptance_ of oral sources can be different. On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Jean-Philippe Béland wrote: > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources. > > JP > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 05:20 John Erling

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-11 Thread John Erling Blad
No, the projects are not that different. Actually I believe the claim that they are so very different is counterproductive. Now we can't make common solutions because a few people on *some* project blocks the roll-out. For example, we could make solutions for quality improvement, but some project

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-08 Thread Asaf Bartov
I agree with Strainu's comments above. I described some issues with adopting policies and ill-fitting policies under the Community Governance capacity page, in the Community Capacity Development program: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Capacity_Development/Community_governance A.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-08 Thread Gnangarra
> > ​ > Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources ​very agree, the intangible sources are a really challenge to way you look at verifiability. Not only are wanting to gather the information and make it possible for others to also access it the very nature of the sources is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-08 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Verifiability can be very different. For example oral sources. JP On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 05:20 John Erling Blad, wrote: > Policy should not have local variations, unless you want to create > something different from Wikipedia. This is about core content policies. > Those are no

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-08 Thread Strainu
2017-08-08 12:20 GMT+03:00 John Erling Blad : > Policy should not have local variations, unless you want to create > something different from Wikipedia. Each version of Wikipedia is a different encyclopedia. There are vastly different inclusion policies and general policies

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-08 Thread John Erling Blad
Policy should not have local variations, unless you want to create something different from Wikipedia. This is about core content policies. Those are no original research, verifiability, and neutral point of view. The one most don't follow is neutral point of view, where projects rewrite world

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-07 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
Can we access this article with no pay wall anywhere? JP On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 9:49 AM Gnangarra wrote: > to quote, worth a read before even considering policies being global > http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23901/abstract > > This article explores the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-07 Thread Gnangarra
its the cultural differences that influence the policy, so who's culture is more significant than everyone elses that will dictate the policies. On 8 August 2017 at 08:14, John Erling Blad wrote: > Yes there are cultural differences between wikipedias on _content_, but > there

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-07 Thread John Erling Blad
Yes there are cultural differences between wikipedias on _content_, but there should be no differences on _policy_ about that content. Note also that there are some differences on use of _facts_ that are highly troublesome, and that comes from relaxed core policies. Armenian genocide for example.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-07 Thread Gnangarra
to quote, worth a read before even considering policies being global http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23901/abstract This article explores the relationship between linguistic culture and the > preferred standards of presenting information based on article > representation in major

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Ziko van Dijk
The number of pillars depends on the language version... And whether some rules is called pilöar not dpes not seem to be pf much importance Ziko John Erling Blad schrieb am Do. 3. Aug. 2017 um 14:42: > Five pillars are moot. > > On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Gnangarra

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Peter Southwood
Citation needed, Cheers, P -Original Message- From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of John Erling Blad Sent: Thursday, 03 August 2017 8:45 PM To: Wikimedia Mailing List Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy I believe policies

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread John Erling Blad
not when they are common by > coincidence. > Cheers, > Peter > > -Original Message- > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On > Behalf Of John Erling Blad > Sent: Thursday, August 3, 2017 1:06 PM > To: Wikimedia Mailing List > Subject

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread John Erling Blad
Five pillars are moot. On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Gnangarra wrote: > The moment you have a centralised policy you take away the ability to > discuss, makes decisions, and achieve consensus from the community that > create the projects. Importantly you create the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Peter Southwood
: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy Common core policies should be on Meta, not Incubator. On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think meta is the wrong place, the coreor base line policies should > be in the incubator not meta and crea

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Gnangarra
The moment you have a centralised policy you take away the ability to discuss, makes decisions, and achieve consensus from the community that create the projects. Importantly you create the opportunity for banned and blocked editors to decide what happens in a community. By having a base set of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Ziko van Dijk
Hello, i wrote something about a comparison of conent policies and will have a presentation at wikicon, but at the momemt i am not at my home computer. Kind regards ziko John Erling Blad schrieb am Mi. 2. Aug. 2017 um 18:19: > I wonder if deviation away from a central core

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread John Erling Blad
Having centralized core policies would lessen the maintenance and process, not increase them. On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Strainu wrote: > The core policies should be the ones pushed by board resolution, and > those should be the absolute minimum required to keep the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread John Erling Blad
Common core policies should be on Meta, not Incubator. On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Gnangarra wrote: > I think meta is the wrong place, the coreor base line policies should be in > the incubator not meta and created as guide at the start of a project then > let the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Strainu
The core policies should be the ones pushed by board resolution, and those should be the absolute minimum required to keep the projects safe from a legal POV. Period. Otherwise, people with little understanding of small Wikipedias will try to push stuff from en.wp. Just recently someone was trying

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Gnangarra
I think meta is the wrong place, the coreor base line policies should be in the incubator not meta and created as guide at the start of a project then let the project develop their uniqueness, individuality from there. If it gets put on meta it will become a you must do this and only this to the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread John Erling Blad
Without common core policies they can not claim that the projects stick within their boundaries. Is a project without a clear policy on "no original research", "verifiability" and "neutral point of view" Wikipedia? Is it enough to just say it is "Wikipedia" to be "Wikipedia"? I believe there

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread John Erling Blad
I used Wikipedia as an example, I would not expect core content policy from Wikipedia to be a good fit for Wikivoyage. Still Wikivoyage could have common ploicies on Meta the same way Wikipedia would do. On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:53 AM, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > On Wed,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread John Erling Blad
What happens now is that policies from enwiki is adopted "as is", but a lot of the rules enwiki does not make sense at all. On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Jean-Philippe Béland wrote: > I oppose to that. Like that communities with bigger number, i.e. English, > will

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Rogol Domedonfors
Is it wise for the Foundation to be seen to controlling content in this way? Would that not jeopardise their legal immunity? "Rogol" On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Sam Wilson wrote: > On Thu, 3 Aug 2017, at 06:53 AM, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-03 Thread Sam Wilson
On Thu, 3 Aug 2017, at 06:53 AM, Keegan Peterzell wrote: > On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Todd Allen wrote: > > > I'd definitely agree there. There are a few non-negotiable points (NPOV, > > copyright and licensing, nonfree content, etc.), but outside those, > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread Keegan Peterzell
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 9:05 AM, John Erling Blad wrote: ​​ > Would it be possible for Wikimedia Foundation to make some sound baseline > policies, and with the option for local projects to refine those? Perhaps > with assistance from editors on Wikipedia? > ​ Precedent has​

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread Keegan Peterzell
On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Todd Allen wrote: > I'd definitely agree there. There are a few non-negotiable points (NPOV, > copyright and licensing, nonfree content, etc.), but outside those, > individual projects generally have latitude to run things as their >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread Todd Allen
I'd definitely agree there. There are a few non-negotiable points (NPOV, copyright and licensing, nonfree content, etc.), but outside those, individual projects generally have latitude to run things as their community needs. And a project with thirty users and a thousand articles will not be well

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread Jean-Philippe Béland
I oppose to that. Like that communities with bigger number, i.e. English, will impose their rules to other communities. It's a basic fundamental principle of Wikimedia projects since the beginning that every community is independant, JP On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 6:19 PM John Erling Blad

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread John Erling Blad
I wonder if deviation away from a central core policy should be banned. That view is probably not very popular. Jeblad On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 4:39 PM, Gnangarra wrote: > its nice idea most just usurp the english policies to start with anyway > when they need it so having a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread Gnangarra
its nice idea most just usurp the english policies to start with anyway when they need it so having a base line on meta would be good though probably it would best to have it set up automatically in the incubator stage so that they get moved across when the projects takes the big leap forward and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread Tito Dutta
Hi, Some works and study was done for Indic Wikimedia projects (there are 24 communities) after a detailed consultation and needs-assessment, please see: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Indic_Wikipedia_Policies_and_Guidelines_Handbook.pdf There are three types of issues: a) Localizing

[Wikimedia-l] Core content policy

2017-08-02 Thread John Erling Blad
Nearly all Wikipedia projects has virtually the same core content policies, but with slightly different wording. Nearly all, because a lot of the smaller lacks them, and a lot has outdated or only partial policies. It takes a lot of time to actually make them and keep them updated. Creating and