Is the following a full statement of Wikipedia's Child Protection
Policy, reflecting all responsibilities that the Wikipedia community
and the Wikimedia Foundation have taken on to protect children in all
of the projects they are involved with and/or sponsor?
On 23 May 2014 13:05, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
Is the following a full statement of Wikipedia's Child Protection
Policy, reflecting all responsibilities that the Wikipedia community
and the Wikimedia Foundation have taken on to protect children in all
of the projects they are
Hello,
Without ever being standardized or including age, there is a social
tradition called the Friendly space policy adopted by many Wikimedia
events. Here is one instance:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Friendly_space_policy
The idea is that in-person Wikimedia events should be safe and
On May 23, 2014, at 10:09 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 May 2014 13:05, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
Is the following a full statement of Wikipedia's Child Protection
Policy, reflecting all responsibilities that the Wikipedia community
and the Wikimedia Foundation have
On 23 May 2014 13:09, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 May 2014 13:05, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
Is the following a full statement of Wikipedia's Child Protection
Policy, reflecting all responsibilities that the Wikipedia community
and the Wikimedia Foundation have taken on
I suppose the caveat would be that what actually happens may be
*broader* than the policy suggests, if anything (eg deleting personal
information on a pre-emptive basis)
On the English Wikipedia, see also
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protecting_children%27s_privacy
Wil Sinclair, 23/05/2014 19:05:
Is the following a full statement
No. You're looking for:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use#4._Refraining_from_Certain_Activities
(first two and last subsections).
Nemo
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list,
This is really helpful.
To clarify:
Is it correct that each project/subdomain of Wikipedia and Wikimedia
has its own, potentially unique Child Protection Policy?
How many of those policies are marked as Proposed?
Are the Proposed policies enforced?
Are there projects/subdomains of Wikipedia and
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:23 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
This is really helpful.
To clarify:
Is it correct that each project/subdomain of Wikipedia and Wikimedia
has its own, potentially unique Child Protection Policy?
How many of those policies are marked as Proposed?
Are the
On 23 May 2014 19:23, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
Is it correct that each project/subdomain of Wikipedia and Wikimedia
has its own, potentially unique Child Protection Policy?
No. The meta policy at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use#4._Refraining_from_Certain_Activities
applies
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
On 23 May 2014 19:23, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
Is it correct that each project/subdomain of Wikipedia and Wikimedia
has its own, potentially unique Child Protection Policy?
No. The meta policy at
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:
If you intend to focus discussion in one place, rather than on
multiple projects, email lists and on non-wikimedia managed websites
at the same time, then
Wil, no need to apologize -- nobody accused you of doing anything wrong,
just pointed out the likely consequences of certain approaches. But I do
think it's very likely that, given your strong connection to the Wikimedia
Foundation, your choice to engage extensively at the Wikipediaocracy site
On 23 May 2014 19:49, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
People can obviously discuss whether the policies are optimal and/or
sufficient, but I'm just asking what the current policies are.
Then stick to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk
Straight What is the policy on X
Then stick to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk
Straight What is the policy on X questions aren't really the purpose of
this mailing list.
--
geni
Thanks for the advice; that's exactly the kind of thing a newbie like
me could use. Also, thanks for the link; I'll read
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
Then stick to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Help_desk
Straight What is the policy on X questions aren't really the purpose of
this mailing list.
--
geni
Thanks for the advice; that's exactly the kind
On 23/05/2014 20:21, Wil Sinclair wrote:
I'd love to explain why I participate on Wikipediocracy, as well as on
the Wikimedia projects. I've already explained it to the WO folks. If
you guys are interested, feel free to start another thread asking me
about it. It's OT for this thread, however.
Earlier this week, we kicked
offhttp://openpolicynetwork.org/launch-of-the-open-policy-network/the
Open
Policy Network http://openpolicynetwork.org/. We announced that the first
project within the Network is the Institute for Open
Leadershiphttp://openpolicynetwork.org/iol/.
The Institute for Open
OK, can you explain why you participate on Wikipediocracy?
Thanks, Edward! I was starting to worry that no one would ask.
I participate on WO because I think every voice deserves to be heard.
And I will go wherever people feel comfortable speaking freely to hear
them. Some of us feel
Its a very bold move on your part Will and it will be interesting how this
develops over time. I dont participate at Wikipediocracy but I lurk regularly.
Perhaps because I have some long-standing issues that no one addresses and its
useful to know others have problems too.
From: w...@wllm.com
Wil Sinclair, 24/05/2014 01:06:
If you're concerned about whether I'm getting
accurate information,
Not really. Generally people are concerned about
a) giving legitimacy to an organised group for consensus manipulation,
ad hominem attacks and harassment of wikimedian;
2) getting distracted by
On 24 May 2014 00:24, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
Not really. Generally people are concerned about
a) giving legitimacy to an organised group for consensus manipulation, ad
hominem attacks and harassment of wikimedian;
2) getting distracted by hypothetically legitimate but
On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 4:06 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
Thanks, Edward! I was starting to worry that no one would ask.
I participate on WO because I think every voice deserves to be heard.
And I will go wherever people feel comfortable speaking freely to hear
them. Some of us feel
Not really. Generally people are concerned about
a) giving legitimacy to an organised group for consensus manipulation, ad
hominem attacks and harassment of wikimedian;
2) getting distracted by hypothetically legitimate but secondary or
irrelevant issues.
Nemo
Hi Nemo, thanks for the
I'm not against anyone participating in any site that criticizes or mocks
Wikipedia or the WMF. But I do get the sense that Wil is jumping into his
wife's new territory with both feet, and not necessarily taking the ginger
approach to the most controversial issues that have confronted the
I figure since you're new it bears repeating: Wikipediocracy isn't really
the go-to general purpose discussion forum for Wikipedia. Wikipedia itself
is the place contributors in good standing talk about the future of the
project. Wikipediocracy is where people go to gossip and troll,
On 24 May 2014 00:06, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote:
OK, can you explain why you participate on Wikipediocracy?
Thanks, Edward! I was starting to worry that no one would ask.
Doesn't it strike you as odd that the question came from an active
wikipediocracy memeber?
I participate on WO
I'm not against anyone participating in any site that criticizes or mocks
Wikipedia or the WMF. But I do get the sense that Wil is jumping into his
wife's new territory with both feet, and not necessarily taking the ginger
approach to the most controversial issues that have confronted the
News and notes: Crisis over Wikimedia Germany's palace revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-05-21/News_and_notes
Traffic report: Doodles' dawn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-05-21/Traffic_report
Featured content: Staggering
Doesn't it strike you as odd that the question came from an active
wikipediocracy memeber?
Honestly, I hadn't thought about it. I'm much more interested in the
question that who asked it.
You know where 4chan is I assume.
No, actually. Can you tell me? What is it?
Again you cite free
Well, Wil, I caught your early posts there and was of the impression you
joined to protect the privacy of a member of your family. And out of
respect for that I declined to ask the question you seemed to be begging to
be asked.
You wouldn't be the first Wikimedian who felt that was a necessary
Wil Sinclair wrote:
I'm not against anyone participating in any site that criticizes or
mocks Wikipedia or the WMF. But I do get the sense that Wil is jumping
into his wife's new territory with both feet, and not necessarily taking
the ginger approach to the most controversial issues that have
On 05/23/2014 07:06 PM, Wil Sinclair wrote:
I participate on WO because I think every voice deserves to be heard.
I'm going to give you a serious piece of advice here as someone who has
held one of the most public position of authority on the English
Wikipedia (the scare quotes are quite on
I'm going to give you a serious piece of advice here as someone who has
held one of the most public position of authority on the English
Wikipedia (the scare quotes are quite on purpose, ask me about them some
day).
Thanks. I appreciate any advice.
Wikipedia Review and its successor WO are
From the interactions I've observed, you (Wil) are too smart to be doing
what you're doing, which makes some of your behavior all the more worrying.
Thanks!
You're willfully ignoring the consequences (real and potential) of your
actions. I'm worried about what it says when you have 18 posts
35 matches
Mail list logo
