Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikidata opinion piece in The Atlantic

2012-04-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
I would like to second that recommendation. I read that article too, and thought it highly relevant. Information is power, and there is a real danger of both monopolisation and manipulation of information here. Andreas On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:46 AM, En Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?

2012-06-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 1:21 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 June 2012 13:15, Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote: I argued at some time that if there was a strong need for such a filter that there would already services in place that would filter the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?

2012-06-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 3:16 PM, Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote: Am 18.06.2012 15:06, schrieb Thomas Morton: I don't think that we need this argument since the filter can't replace parents anyway. But it is a constant part of the discussions with various exaggerated

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?

2012-06-20 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, actually, along with several other educational ones, some with children's games, her school website, etc. The chances that she would randomly stumble across a sexual image on Wikipedia are -vanishingly- slim, ...

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?

2012-06-21 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Child porn is illegal, that's been upheld by the Supreme Court repeatedly, end of discussion. If 2257 were similarly upheld to apply even in circumstances of educational/artistic work, I suppose we'd similarly have to follow it like it or not, but it is untested in such areas, and I suspect

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?

2012-06-21 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: Well, first of all, why? Secondly, I'm not talking just about sexually explicit photos. Wikipedia has photos of people being or about to be [[behead]]ed, [[torture]]d, [[kidnap]]ped, [[assassination]]ed, etc. I checked, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who invoked principle of least surprise for the image filter?

2012-06-21 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: That was a highly theoretical scenario (and one you brought up for that reason, as I recall.) But in practice, we do have photos of victims at articles such as [[Rape of Nanking]] and [[Holocaust]]. Some of those photos

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TVTropes deletes all pages with Rape in title under advertising pressure.

2012-06-26 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: Besides, the ones putting pressure on TV Tropes, and who made them take the pages down, are Google. That is the same Google who are a major financial contributor to Wikimedia. True. But if Google told WMF Change

Re: [Wikimedia-l] TVTropes deletes all pages with Rape in title under advertising pressure.

2012-06-26 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: I've never understood why that was considered non-neutral. WMF, as an entity, can have viewpoints, especially as relates to the organization itself. The

Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer

2012-06-27 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Jimmy is not Wikipedia. What about that is hard to understand? I would have agreed with you half a year ago. But Jimbo decided there would be a SOPA blackout, and a SOPA blackout was had. And every press article that mentions his campaign for O'Dwyer has the obligatory Wikipedia founder label.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer

2012-06-27 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: On Wednesday, 27 June 2012 at 18:05, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I would have agreed with you half a year ago. But Jimbo decided there would be a SOPA blackout, and a SOPA blackout was had. And every press article

Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer

2012-06-27 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:19 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 June 2012 18:51, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: And hell, there really are two points of view about copyright, I understand you've not really studied the subject but there are far more than that. Let's just

Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer

2012-06-27 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 9:46 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: On the topic of Jimmy; Wikipedia is his calling card, it opens doors. I think he hasn't done enough in many situations to distance his own views from us; which is unfortunate. But not necessarily deliberate :)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer

2012-06-27 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 11:42 PM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote: It would be interesting to see the community develop its own high profile media contacts so this view can be communicated to the world! If Jimmy can write this in The Guardian (a paper which really seems

Re: [Wikimedia-l] crazy deletionists!

2012-07-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 03/07/2012 11:09 AM, Delirium wrote: 1) the sources really are *very* good in that case, not merely ok sources like newspaper articles; My own (admitedly radical) point of view is that popular media - and that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] crazy deletionists!

2012-07-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 12:15 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 4 July 2012 00:04, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with Marc. The other day, someone said here on the list, It's almost as if what the press say and what the facts are in reality are two different

Re: [Wikimedia-l] crazy deletionists!

2012-07-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 12:38 AM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 03/07/2012 7:04 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: What would a Wikipedia look like that did not make use of press sources? It would look a hell of a lot more like an encyclopedia. Thousands of silly arguments would never

Re: [Wikimedia-l] crazy deletionists!

2012-07-05 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Wikipedia-l is not the most active of lists, to put it mildly. Those interested in discussing the potential advantages and drawbacks of a Wikipedia without press sources and coming up with some ideas for a feasible compromise are advised that there is a related thread on Wikipediocracy, at

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Russian Wikipedia goes on strike

2012-07-12 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 12:35 AM, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.orgwrote: On 11/07/12 00:32, David Gerard wrote: On 10 July 2012 15:29, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: SOPA didn't threaten the existence of Wikipedia, Geoff Brigham opined otherwise, IIRC. Yes, on the

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

2012-07-14 Thread Andreas Kolbe
I do think the Wikimedia sites look dated, and very male, too. One example I always think of when this issue comes up is Wikifashion: http://wikifashion.com/wiki/Main_Page I would love for Wikipedia to have optional skins like that, made by graphic designers, just like you can have all sorts of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board resolution on personal image hiding feature

2012-07-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
The board resolution announcement presently shows that it passed 9-1, with Jimbo's the only voice dissenting: http://www.webcitation.org/69AyEvzIS On his talk page, however, Jimbo claims that this misrepresents him, and that he voted to scrap the image filter like everyone else:

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

2012-07-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Sun, Jul 15, 2012 at 7:34 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: On 15 July 2012 14:44, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: The way to solve the design issue is to enable third parties to create alternative skins that users can install in preference over the default ones offered

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

2012-07-16 Thread Andreas Kolbe
It shouldn't take five years though, should it? And there are dozens (hundreds?) of jobs in queues, waiting to be done, which can't be done because nobody is free to do them. On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 12:50 AM, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: On Monday, 16 July 2012 at 19:46, Andreas Kolbe

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

2012-07-16 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 2:24 AM, Mark delir...@hackish.org wrote: On 7/16/12 7:43 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: We need to be a lot friendlier to the non-programming public. I agree that's true, but I'd also be curious how we can do that without falling into the trap of the user-friendly

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

2012-07-25 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Deryck Chan deryckc...@wikimedia.hkwrote: On 17 July 2012 00:46, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: I honestly don't understand why it is taking so many years to develop a WYSIWYG editor, for example, or a new Commons search function. Honestly

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

2012-07-25 Thread Andreas Kolbe
getting done, but would only result in them sitting around playing cards, I'll shut up about this. Andreas On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 8:56 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 25 July 2012 20:48, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: So there were how many years of faffing about before

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

2012-07-26 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 7:42 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: On 07/25/12 12:48 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: So there were how many years of faffing about before they hired *one guy* for this project? This is an organisation with a $20m annual budget, now acquiring umpteen paid

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimediauk-l] The situation with the chair

2012-07-27 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: The point really is who actually cares about ArbCom decisions I am really surprised to see a former member of ArbCom say this. Everybody on this list cares about ArbCom decisions, most of the time, and so

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

2012-08-02 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 9:45 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 August 2012 05:13, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: This appears to be an unprecedented power-grab by the office of the General Counsel. Um ... that's a bizarre perception. Well, just look at the number of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

2012-08-02 Thread Andreas Kolbe
, altruistic purpose and then demand consideration in return for what has been given is disgusting. * http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-19104494 On Aug 2, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 12:11 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: What type

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

2012-08-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe
it over time. Very few people throw sustained effort or money into a vacuum without any care whether it grows or dies. FT2 On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: For the record, I did not endorse the SOPA blackout, and I deeply resent my work

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

2012-08-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: We do everything in our power to prevent the problem, but it would be absolutely cost prohibitive to do it 100% with the difference being that fine grained, and this law gives you the right to shut us down if we can't hit

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

2012-08-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe
of participants in the blackout hangout (most aren't active on mailing lists) and can participate in this analysis with you. Sarah Sent from my iPhone On Aug 3, 2012, at 12:52 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Policy and Political Affiliations Guideline

2012-08-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:12 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Why are there so many various levels and steps if it's not a determination about principles and about whether a particular cause meets Wikimedia's mission? This is what's confusing me. People on the talk page at Meta-Wiki

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] 2012-13 Annual Plan of the Wikimedia Foundation

2012-08-04 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 10:17 PM, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org wrote: Of course, here the term high quality does not necessarily mean, say, featured content (e.g. on the English Wikipedia, featured articles currently make up less than 0.1% of the total articles), but instead refers to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outage: what I'm telling the press

2012-08-06 Thread Andreas Kolbe
David, the BBC says you told them the following: ---o0o--- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19148151 *Donations* Mr Gerard joked that due to the site's limited financial resources, some of its infrastructure relied on gaffer tape and string. In an error message posted to the site, the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outage: what I'm telling the press

2012-08-06 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 August 2012 20:43, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: David, the BBC says you told them the following: See, this is where you part ways with how the media works. These days I count it as a win if anything

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outage: what I'm telling the press

2012-08-06 Thread Andreas Kolbe
old owl, the world would be a much, much better place. Richard Symonds (Wikimedia UK staff, but with my volunteer hat on). On 6 August 2012 21:06, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 8:54 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 6 August 2012 20:43

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outage: what I'm telling the press

2012-08-06 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Thanks for the nice reply, Andreas. You get bonus points for liking barges! There are some very homey ones here in Cambridge ... with pot plants (bananas ...) and hanging baskets and everything, and a

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

2012-08-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Yes indeed. Cool ideas ... and they look a bit more *professional* than our effort. ;) Andreas On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 11:55 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Michel Vuijlsteke wrote: Well, it's certainly a possible starting point for discussion: http://www.wikipediaredefined.com/

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Articles for Creation broken

2012-08-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
I currently see 370 submissions pending. Does this mean that someone has processed 700 articles since the beginning of this thread, or am I looking at the wrong thing? Andreas On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 12:36 PM, Steven Zhang cro0...@gmail.com wrote: So, I had a look at articles for creation

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Articles for Creation broken

2012-08-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 11:07 AM, Katie Chan k...@ktchan.info wrote: On 19/08/2012 11:04, Andreas Kolbe wrote: I currently see 370 submissions pending. Does this mean that someone has processed 700 articles since the beginning of this thread, or am I looking at the wrong thing? More than

[Wikimedia-l] Legality under French law of hosting personal details such as race and sexuality in Wikipedia

2012-08-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
A contributor has raised an interesting questions on wikien-l that concerns French Wikimedians. As French Wikimedians are unlikely to see it there, and wikifr-l seems moribund, I've appended a copy of the post below. ---o0o---

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Legality under French law of hosting personal details such as race and sexuality in Wikipedia

2012-08-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
I've been told (and have verified) that the French Wikipedia indeed does without categories to mark people as Jewish, LGBT, etc. I actually quite like that approach. On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 7:53 PM, Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen

Re: [Wikimedia-l] CNET News: Corruption in Wikiland? Paid PR scandal erupts at Wikipedia

2012-09-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 3:48 AM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.comwrote: In short: I think people like Max and Roger, who make public declarations about their identities and conflicts of interest, are not the ones who scare me. We can always find those people and start a conversation

Re: [Wikimedia-l] CNET News: Corruption in Wikiland? Paid PR scandal erupts at Wikipedia

2012-09-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 8:18 AM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.comwrote: On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 11:14 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: In the past, those conversations were short, and ended in a permaban (cf. Jimbo's past statements about blocking anyone offering

Re: [Wikimedia-l] CNET News: Corruption in Wikiland? Paid PR scandal erupts at Wikipedia

2012-09-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Steven, We know people have been beating a door to Roger's path ever since Monmouthpedia; ... or even a path to Roger's door :)) (Sorry, tired.) ___ Wikimedia-l mailing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] CNET News: Corruption in Wikiland? Paid PR scandal erupts at Wikipedia

2012-09-19 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Sep 19, 2012 at 10:46 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: He gets to decide which town goes forward, and whichever town goes forward pays him a consultancy fee. This, OTOH, is spurious made-up bullshit. Look, David, if a dozen towns express an interest in his services, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation and Saudi Telecom (STC) partner to provide access to Wikipedia free of mobile data charges in the Middle East

2012-10-14 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Will access to Wikipedia for people in Saudi Arabia be uncensored? Has there been any agreement with Saudi Telecom on censorship? Andreas On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi folks - sharing a news release that WMF issued this morning along with STC.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation and Saudi Telecom (STC) partner to provide access to Wikipedia free of mobile data charges in the Middle East

2012-10-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:51 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 6:23 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote: On 14 October 2012 22:12, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Will access to Wikipedia for people in Saudi Arabia be uncensored? Very unlikely. Has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation and Saudi Telecom (STC) partner to provide access to Wikipedia free of mobile data charges in the Middle East

2012-10-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
... some feature development. Please just tell us: Is there anything about political or any other kind of censorship in the WMF/STC agreement and/or the cooperation? Was the topic ever raised in the discussions? If so, in which contexts? What was decided? Is it part of the written agreement?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation and Saudi Telecom (STC) partner to provide access to Wikipedia free of mobile data charges in the Middle East

2012-10-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:19 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Yann It's not a partnership with the government, it's with a telecom company Theo, Saudi Telecom was wholly owned by the Saudi government when it was founded in 1998. It held monopolies then. After a partial

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation and Saudi Telecom (STC) partner to provide access to Wikipedia free of mobile data charges in the Middle East

2012-10-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 1:13 AM, Kul Wadhwa kwad...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi Andreas, On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: ... some feature development. Please just tell us: Is there anything about political or any other kind of censorship in the WMF

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Foundation and Saudi Telecom (STC) partner to provide access to Wikipedia free of mobile data charges in the Middle East

2012-10-16 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Thanks for the info, Osama. Andreas On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 6:29 AM, Osama Khalid osa...@gnu.org wrote: I am from Saudi Arabia, so I guess I will be able to explain a few issues. First of all, it's important to note that Saudi Arabia is a good example of a pretty much totalitarian state,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2012 Editor survey launched

2012-11-05 Thread Andreas Kolbe
I didn't see the banner either, but this solved the problem for me: 1. Make sure Suppress display of the fundraiser banner in your preferences (it's under gadgets) is NOT checked. 2. Set your browser to Private Browsing or Incognito of Stealth mode, whichever term your browser uses; this is to

[Wikimedia-l] Russian Internet encyclopedia blacklisted

2012-11-12 Thread Andreas Kolbe
The encyclopedia in question -- see http://lurkmore.to/ -- seems to be a bit similar to Encyclopaedia Dramatica. http://rapsinews.com/news/20121112/265322007.html Its blacklisting took place under the new law the Russian Wikipedia protested against recently. Andreas

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

2013-01-05 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 5:48 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: We have been, to some extent, the victims of our own success. We grew exponentially and not organically, and given the roots of our community, the usual group structural forms were eschewed. There was also practically no money

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

2013-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:41 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.comwrote: David Gerard, 09/01/2013 00:32: On 8 January 2013 23:27, Kim Bruningk...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote: I think that the requirements for a wiki (open, welcoming, anyone can edit, eventualism) are always going to be

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

2013-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote: I think that the requirements for a wiki (open, welcoming, anyone can edit, eventualism) are always going to be at tension vs the requirements for an encyclopedia (reliable, good sourcing, etc). Right now,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

2013-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 4:37 PM, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hi Andreas/Nemo Which column are you looking at to give you the growth numbers on those projects? I am mostly looking at the column for editors making more than 100 edits a month, as that is where the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

2013-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Here are the French charts: http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/ChartsWikipediaFR.htm Here are the English ones: http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/ChartsWikipediaEN.htm I've fixed the link to the English charts: I accidentally

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Editor retention (was Re: Big data benefits and limitations (relevance: WMF editor engagement, fundraising, and HR practices))

2013-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.comwrote: Andreas Kolbe, 10/01/2013 19:21: Open these two pages: http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/**ChartsWikipediaFR.htmhttp://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/ChartsWikipediaFR.htm http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Strange, surprising, bold and unnecessary - reply to the WMF board statement

2013-02-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 3:04 AM, Sarah slimvir...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:59 PM, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote: BTW that entire rag tag group of amateurs doing something amazing, doesn't hold very true indefinitely We were doing something amazing when we started, but

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An idea for a different type of community-pedia project

2013-02-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Doh! For Wikipedia community governance review at the end of the first paragraph read Wikimedia UK governance review. A. On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: An idea that arose from a discussion on whether to lift restrictions on Gibraltarpedia hooks

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Rui, There are four answers I could give you. See whether you like any of them: *Answer the First* This problem has existed ever since Wikipedia became visible enough for agenda-driven editors to bother with it, and people have made complaints like yours ever since. Nothing has changed, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Marc, The page I linked to says in part: It goes without saying that using the process described we are also unable to verify the identity of the person(s) behind the user account. (Es versteht sich von selbst, dass wir mit dem beschriebenen Verfahren auch nicht die Identität der hinter dem

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Andreas Kolbe
. Best regards, Rui On 23 July 2013 19:12, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Rui, There are four answers I could give you. See whether you like any of them: *Answer the First* This problem has existed ever since Wikipedia became visible enough for agenda-driven editors

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The soft underbelly of the WP: the sponsored private fiefdoms that thrive in the blind spots

2013-07-23 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:36 AM, Rui Correia correia@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Andreas Iit didn't cross my mind that you would actually go and check - at the time the search terms were in Portuguese, so you will probably find different results - If I find the original pic I will send it to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's have the courage to sit down and talk about VisualEditor

2013-07-31 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 7:28 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 31 July 2013 19:27, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 5:36 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: Erik, James - how did de:wp convinced you when en:wp hasn't? I don't really agree

Re: [Wikimedia-l] is wikipedia zero illegal because it violates net neutrality?

2013-08-27 Thread Andreas Kolbe
I guess the benefit to the Wikipedia Zero providers is that making Wikipedia available for free to their subscribers is a competitive advantage for them. That seems obvious enough, and it is acknowledged in the Wikimedia Foundation FAQ, http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mobile_partnerships:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] is wikipedia zero illegal because it violates net neutrality?

2013-08-27 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Mon, Aug 26, 2013 at 10:13 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.comwrote: It was not rhetorical, but you missed the point. Net neutrality is an issue because service providers (can / may / often do) become a local monopoly of sorts. Monopilies are not necessarily bad (how many water

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF employee writing articles for $300

2014-01-06 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Nathan, I am unable to find a mention of sockpuppetry in the Terms of Use, whether in Section 4 or elsewhere. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use I don't think there could be such a mention, really, given that project policies recognise a number of legitimate uses of socks. A.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF employee writing articles for $300

2014-01-06 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Smith, they did not use the name of some other user. They created multiple accounts. There was no other user whose username they used, or whom they tried to impersonate. On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF employee writing articles for $300

2014-01-06 Thread Andreas Kolbe
. That is not a permissible use of socks. The community expects to place more scrutiny on paid editors, not less. On Jan 6, 2014 6:23 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: That doesn't follow to me from that wording, Nathan. The English Wikipedia for example allows socking to enable

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF employee writing articles for $300

2014-01-06 Thread Andreas Kolbe
wrote: I'm not in principle against transparent paid editing, but it could actually be considered to violate the ToU's wording: misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity Regards, Sir48 2014/1/6 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com Sure, Todd. But that is not actually

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

2014-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Christophe's comment about Wikipedia's company articles not being very complete reminded me of a fun infographic: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5474/11871822903_714f36a83e_h.jpg There is a strange, systemic hostility towards business at work in the English Wikipedia. Combined with a love for pop

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

2014-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Quite. Museums' self-interest in employing a Wikipedian-in-Residence is often quite evident from the way the position is described (raise our profile etc.) And what about, say, the Henry Ford Museum? Or the Volkswagen museum? Is that not knowledge? Is it evil, because it's part of a business?

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

2014-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 3:13 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjor...@wikimedia.org wrote: (Note these are my own personal views and in no way reflect any views of the WMF or anyone else) On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 7:34 AM, Christophe Henner christophe.hen...@gmail.com wrote: Now, the question

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

2014-01-10 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote: Ting and Christophe, Glad to hear we are moving forward on finding more sophisticated ways of thinking about paid editing. At least for the English Wikipedians I've talked to, many are pleasantly surprised that the

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

2014-01-11 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:35 PM, Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de wrote: Hello Peter, I see the following two possibilities: Either the paid editing brings a higher quality and thus by that quality imposes itself as an authority and thus discourage further unqualified editing Or the paid

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

2014-01-12 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Andre Engels andreeng...@gmail.comwrote: On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Which reminds me – I often think it odd that Wikimedia will fund a Wikipedian-in-Residence for some regional tourist attraction (think

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding

2014-04-01 Thread Andreas Kolbe
As far as I am concerned, what was wrong with this situation wasn't that the Wikimedia Foundation paid a trained academic to edit Wikipedia. I venture that most donors and members of the general public wouldn't have a problem with that at all. What was wrong? 1. The obvious appearance of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53, 690 of WMF funding

2014-04-16 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Article on the matter in The Daily Dot, April 14: http://www.dailydot.com/business/wikipedia-paid-editing-scandal-stanton/ Apparently, Tim Sandole complains of not having been managed properly by anybody, saying, The person I dealt with at Wikimedia didn't seem to know anything about Wikipedia.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Anne, there are really well-established systems of scholarly peer review. There is no need to reinvent the wheel, or add distractions such as infoboxes and other bells and whistles. I find it extraordinary that, after 13 years, a project designed to make the sum of human knowledge available to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
mellitus, back pain, hyperlipidemia and concussion. Carry on. On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:19 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 23:14, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: For what it's worth, there was a recent external study of Wikipedia's medical content that came

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
Junk science? I suppose the Article Feedback Tool was more scientific, then, because that's the best the Foundation has come up with so far. On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:27 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 7 May 2014 18:14, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: Anne, there are really

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:32 PM, Michael Maggs mich...@maggs.name wrote: Measuring the quality of Wikipedia articles in general is an issue that Wikimedia UK is interested in looking at, though by means of automation rather than the gold-standard but much less scalable method of scholarly

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 1:06 AM, Thyge ltl.pri...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe you should suggest that to the universities and not just to this mailing list. Nothing prevents to set up an independent panel of academic experts and to start doing that job today. regards, Thyge Well, I'd like the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:24 PM, Wil Sinclair w...@wllm.com wrote: I'm a total newb here, and I know the grant system between WMF and the different chapters has been debated in the past. But I have a simple question: if WMF is

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 2:41 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: I think perhaps there is a lack of research into the extent of research already being done by independent, qualified third parties. Several examples are provided in the references of the study you posted, Andreas. For

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-07 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, of course readability analysis is done by automation. I've yet to find a consistent readability assessment that doesn't use automation. It's not an area where subjectivity is particularly useful. And that was an average

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-08 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:08 AM, edward edw...@logicmuseum.com wrote: While academic attitudes to Wikipedia may be of some interest they are not a proxy for quality. I don't understand this. I'm not saying I disagree, I just don't understand. How would an attitude be a 'proxy' for quality?

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-08 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:17 AM, Anthony Cole ahcole...@gmail.com wrote: Regarding expert review, Doc James has just announced that a version of Wikipedia's article Dengue fever has passed peer review and been accepted for publication by the journal Open Medicine. I think this is a special

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-09 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 8:26 PM, phoebe ayers phoebe.w...@gmail.com wrote: -- Forwarded message -- From: David Gerard dger...@gmail.com While acknowledging the likely truth of the flaws in scientific knowledge production as it stands (single studies in medicine being

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Metrics - accuracy of Wikipedia articles

2014-05-09 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hello everyone, I think Wikimedia UK has an example project, related to medical articles, that may be of interest. John Byrne is the Wikimedian in Residence at Cancer Research UK, one of the UK's largest

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons' frontpage probably shouldn't prominently feature a decontextualised stack of corpses.

2014-05-13 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: Admins and crats on commons have also historically made a large number of decisions that fly in the face of WMF board resolutions, often repeatedly. David Gerard's point is ringing very true here: you will not

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons' frontpage probably shouldn't prominently feature a decontextualised stack of corpses.

2014-05-13 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.comwrote: Admins and crats on commons have also historically made a large

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons' frontpage probably shouldn't prominently feature a decontextualised stack of corpses.

2014-05-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:20 PM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.comwrote: Andreas, in response to your last message -- I'm perfectly fine with the examples you provided! I just happen to think they do a better job supporting my position (Commons is healthy and productive) I'd have been

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons' frontpage probably shouldn't prominently feature a decontextualised stack of corpses.

2014-05-15 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Pete, you know the toothbrush image you talk about on your blog still shows up on a Commons search for electric toothbrush, right? It's in Category:Nude or partially nude people with electric toothbrushes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Commons' frontpage probably shouldn't prominently feature a decontextualised stack of corpses.

2014-05-16 Thread Andreas Kolbe
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 9:05 AM, Pete Forsyth petefors...@gmail.com wrote: The point of I'm trying to make in this discussion is, we do a lot more good by focusing on what's working, and then expanding on that, than we do by getting all accusatory about the things that are *not* working.

  1   2   3   4   5   >