Re: [Wikimedia-l] On relationship gossip and appropriate conversation

Austin and all, I'm just coming back to this, and see that I have indeed been widely interpreted as having spoken from personal animosity. My one comment on this, which I hope will be allowed through, is that I carry absolutely no personal animosity toward anybody I mentioned, and if any of them d

[Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

Hi all, As I scanned through the weekend emails on this list I noticed that many of you are ready to get back to discussing the goals we are all working on. I am really glad to see that. We have plenty of interesting projects to discuss without the gossip. Let's respect the time that many followin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

I must agree with the frustration over the quality of discussion on this mailing list lately, but I did want to make clear my appreciation to the list admins, who have decided to avoid playing semantic word games over what is and is not appropriate, and started moderating people who want to use thi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

On 16/06/14 13:03, billinghurst wrote: > I am looking for a productive mailing list that discusses matters of > importance to the Wikimedia community. That the people on such a list can > have these discussions politely, respectfully, and with concern for others > in that the words that say, and at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

On 16 June 2014 10:41, Tim Starling wrote: > The way to have a better mailing list is to not use a mailing list. > NNTP with a web frontend would be better in pretty much every way. There are no good web frontends for NNTP. (GMane and Google Groups both manage "worst of both worlds".) My hypoth

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

On 16 June 2014 10:43, David Gerard wrote: > On 16 June 2014 10:41, Tim Starling wrote: >> The way to have a better mailing list is to not use a mailing list. >> NNTP with a web frontend would be better in pretty much every way. > There are no good web frontends for NNTP. (GMane and Google Grou

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

We have an updated Wikipedia Beta app? Aha, so we do. :) With a little "edit" pencil next to sections... And an elegant check to see if you want to save an anon edit or log in, after editing. Very nice indeed. Looks like a solid improvement. I'll try editing with it for a week. Hmm, still no

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

Thinking twice is nice and that's what mailman moderation is about. Just for this month we could half the soft quota (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l ) and calculate it over two months. According to http://www.infodisiac.com/Wikipedia/ScanMail/Wikimedia-l.html this would mean moder

[Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the fellow wikipedians on svwp It is now close to one year since the 1M article on ins

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

Hoi, I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM [1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten wrote: > After

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

> I am looking for a productive mailing list that discusses matters of > importance to the Wikimedia community. That the people on such a list can > have these discussions politely, respectfully, and with concern for others > in that the words that say, and attitudes taken. I want to see > announc

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look better a year from now Anders Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44: Hoi

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

Nemo, thanks for that - it really made me laugh. Jane On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > Thinking twice is nice and that's what mailman moderation is about. Just > for this month we could half the soft quota (https://meta.wikimedia.org/ > wiki/Wikimedia-l ) and calc

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

Hoi, Lets talk Thanks, Gerard On 16 June 2014 13:29, Anders Wennersten wrote: > we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our > botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many > perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

Everyone move to wikien-l! It's pretty much disused now. Go on, give me work to do. On 16 June 2014 11:23, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: > Thinking twice is nice and that's what mailman moderation is about. Just for > this month we could half the soft quota > (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikime

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please rename this list to shitfight-l, and give us a list where civil discussion about wikimedia can take place

Hoi, Sorry but en,wp is not for me and many others.. No reasons except that it is not what I/we am/are involved in. We need something that is more inclusive. Thanks, GerardM On 16 June 2014 13:44, David Gerard wrote: > Everyone move to wikien-l! It's pretty much disused now. Go on, give >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

Ahh, but some of us are on iOS which doesn’t seem to have been updated on the App Store in a while! The latest status update (at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/status#2014-05-monthly) seems to suggest it’s in Alpha state. Please can someone from the Apps Team give me some insight

[Wikimedia-l] FDC nominations - please ask your questions to the candidates

Hello all, it is with great pleasure that I see the long and diverse list of people having nominated themselves to participate in the FDC in the years to come. [1] The deadline for nominations has passed, and it is now time for the community to ask questions to the candidates. While the next roun

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:12 AM, Lila Tretikov wrote: >>Hi all, >> >>As I scanned through the weekend emails on this list I noticed that many of >>you are ready to get back to discussing the goals we are all working on. I >>am really glad to see that. We have plenty of interesting projects to >>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what prevented you of using the data? And from which different perspectives? Cheers, Micru On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten wrote: > we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our > botp

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 8:30 AM, Thehelpfulone wrote: > Ahh, but some of us are on iOS which doesn’t seem to have been updated on the > App Store in a while! The latest status update (at > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Apps/status#2014-05-monthly) seems > to suggest it’s in Alpha sta

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

Just a few examples. *It takes up to 6 months and a lot of argumentations to get a new datatype defined. If you are commited you succeed but if it just need it but do not have the time, you fail *The discussions among the Wikidatapeople are most trying *The data and datatypes are not stable. Su

[Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia mobile apps (was: Please be considerate of everyone's time.)

As Sage notes, the functionality of the new apps is about the same on both Android and iOS, with some differences in the UI. Like the beta Android version, we're using a sidebar ToC instead of collapsing sections (though it's a bit fancier looking on iOS right now!) and we've added basic login and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

Hi Anders, for my understanding, could you give a few examples of what kind of datatypes are still missing that you would need (ideally datatypes I can actually understand). Thanks! Lodewijk 2014-06-16 16:20 GMT+02:00 Anders Wennersten : > Just a few examples. > *It takes up to 6 months and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

That is quite unfortunate. I understand that when you say "datatype" you mean "property"? From my experience those are best suggested in the frame of a "task force" or "wikiproject", then you have some context and a broader view on how data can be represented. Sometimes new users come with the ques

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

Thanks, you are right they are called Properties Our effort consist of 3-5 rather independent botgerantionseffort, each talking with wikidata by themselves and I am the one understand the technique least. So I can just repeat some of the things I have been told *Inconsistent licensing (and data

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

Hi all, We would like to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees has approved an amendment to Section 4 of the Terms of Use to require disclosure of paid editing. This follows the extensive discussion of the amendment

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

Stephen LaPorte writes: > We would like to announce that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees > has approved an amendment to Section 4 of the Terms of Use to require > disclosure of paid editing. There is a proposal on Wikimedia Commons that aims to opt-out that project from the amendment,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

Hoi, WOW, CAN SOMEONE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO CLARIFY IF THIS WILL GET A HEARING? Either it is something that should apply to all projects and consequently it is a board issue or it is en.wp only. When it is en.wp only, the policy is either not carefully thought through or it should not be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

Hi GerardM, have you read Stephen's email? On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > WOW, > CAN SOMEONE WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO CLARIFY IF THIS WILL GET A > HEARING? > > Either it is something that should apply to all projects and consequently > it is a board issue

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

Not quite sure what you're shouting about, Gerard. The amendment clearly gives individual projects the right to have an alternative to this particular section of the terms of use, and that alternative can be either more strict or less strict. Seems Commons is considering an alternative that is ve

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Mexico. Report of Activities of May 2014

Dear community: Below you will find the report of activities of the month of May 2014 done by the volunteers of Wikimedia Mexico. Please don't hesitate to get in touch with us if you require extra information about this activities or only to make some suggestions. The report is also available on

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia engineering report, May 2014

Hi, The report covering Wikimedia engineering activities in May 2014 is now available. Wiki version: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_engineering_report/2014/May Blog version: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/06/15/engineering-report-may-2014/ We're also proposing a shorter, simpler and t

[Wikimedia-l] Court decision in Jones v. Dirty World Recording Entertainment LLC

(Cross-posted from my En-wiki talkpage) The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has issued its decision today in *Jones v. Dirty World Entertainment Recordings LLC*. This is a well-known dispute involving

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Court decision in Jones v. Dirty World Recording Entertainment LLC

On 16/06/2014 21:07, Newyorkbrad wrote: In its decision, the Sixth Circuit takes a broad view of Section 230 and holds that Section 230 protection is not lost even where the website operator solicited contributors to post unsourced and uncorroborated "dirt" about anyone they pleased, and even whe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Court decision in Jones v. Dirty World Recording Entertainment LLC

It's certainly a very troubling outcome given the facts of the case, which I was reporting rather than endorsing. The appeals court relied partly on the breadth of the statute enacted by Congress, and partly on the difficulty of drawing lines reflecting which types of conduct by a site-owner would

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 6:22 AM, edward wrote: > Could I ask if there are any plans by WMF to address some of the content > problems in Wikipedia? Pretty much any article in my specialist area > (which is actually not all that specialist) has serious problems - gross > factual errors, omissions,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

Hi Ed - Though I'm not sure what your area of specialty is offhand, I'd point you towards the Wiki Education Foundation and the US Education Program. Although the program has a bit of a checkered history, I feel like it's starting to come together quite well, and it does have the direct aim of im

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

On 17 June 2014 00:23, Steven Walling wrote: > > The Wikimedia Foundation does not write nor edit content on Wikipedia, nor > does it dictate editorial policy. All of the content is written, edited, > and controlled by whomever would like to volunteer their time to improve > it. > > As such, this

[Wikimedia-l] The tragedy of Commons

Hi, Some Commons contributors like to ask impossible requirements, and threaten to delete files if these are not met. We have now a case of famous pictures from the government of Israel and Israel Defense Forces. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Matanya#Files_and_pages_that_were_delete

[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMF Board of Trustees: Minutes of April 2014 meeting

Hello all, We have published the minutes from the Board's April 2014 meeting in San Francisco, which you may find here: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/2014-04-25 -- Stephen LaPorte Legal Counsel Wikimedia Foundation *NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMF Board of Trustees: Minutes of April 2014 meeting

I am very happy to see the discussion of user groups and the concern about their lack of formation. Hopefully, the process can be amended to fit better to what was originally envisioned. From: slapo...@wikimedia.org Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 01:49:53 +0200 To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Risker wrote: > Not quite sure what you're shouting about, Gerard. The amendment clearly > gives individual projects the right to have an alternative to this > particular section of the terms of use, and that alternative can be either > more strict or less stric

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

On 16 June 2014 20:48, phoebe ayers wrote: > On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Risker wrote: > > > Not quite sure what you're shouting about, Gerard. The amendment clearly > > gives individual projects the right to have an alternative to this > > particular section of the terms of use, and that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Court decision in Jones v. Dirty World Recording Entertainment LLC

> On 17 Jun 2014, at 4:17 am, edward wrote: > >> On 16/06/2014 21:07, Newyorkbrad wrote: >> In its decision, the Sixth Circuit takes a broad view of Section 230 and >> holds that Section 230 protection is not lost even where the website >> operator solicited contributors to post unsourced and un

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Disclosure amendment to the Terms of Use

Risker wrote: >I'm so very disappointed in the Board and the WMF for this TOU amendment, >which was obviously written to quell concerns about English Wikipedia, >with extremely little consideration of any other project. Now projects >*must* formally exempt practices that are perfectly acceptable t

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Please be considerate of everyone's time.

On 17/06/2014 00:28, Kevin Gorman wrote: >>Hi Ed - I'm not sure what your area of specialty is offhand, This http://cuapress.cua.edu/res/docs/Fall-2014-Catalog.pdf#page=17 will be published in September this year, about the early philosophy of the medieval theologian Duns Scotus. My focus is on