Hello all,
These days at the Village Pump of zhwiki, many wikipedians are
arguing about whether Wikimedia project should apply to the US
Copyright Law that is where the servers were placed, or the local
ones, for us, that is the P.R. of China Copyright Law. These thread
came from a disagreement o
On Jun 24, 2009, at 6:34 PM, geni wrote:
> You would need to know about some wiki politics in 2006 to get it.
OK, so 'splain it to me? And to Rand, who wasn't here in 2006
either? :-) But let's not also negate the other part of what I wrote;
these things don't exist in a vacuum. The circu
(As this email may enact changes that affect the total Wikimedia
community, please feel free to forward or post this email on any and all
applicable lists. We would like as much feedback as possible.)
Wikimedians--
In advance of our Annual Fundraiser (starting in November), Wikimedia is
undert
2009/6/24 philippe :
> Geni, I think that's a flawed argument, if I understand you correctly.
You would need to know about some wiki politics in 2006 to get it.
Suffice to say the side bar suggestion didn't get very far. Of course
at that point we were informed that the current anon notice was an
Geni, I think that's a flawed argument, if I understand you correctly.
Sure, it was there before... under radically different conditions. No
one can say that the editing/reading habits of users then are the same
as the editing/reading habits of users now.
I like the idea of giving it a shot,
2009/6/24 David Gerard :
> 2009/6/24 Pedro Sanchez :
>
>> With the license move...
>> do we still accept GFDL-only material?
>> I've seen OTRSer today accepting and tagging entries released as GFDL only.
>
>
> Is this images for Commons? I'd personally like to deprecate the GFDL,
> but if it's a Co
2009/6/24 Rand Montoya :
> (As this email may enact changes that affect the total Wikimedia
> community, please feel free to forward or post this email on any and all
> applicable lists. I would like as much feedback as possible.)
>
> Wikimedians--
>
> We have begun exploring ideas for enhancing th
Your goal, which is to have "a small change to the Wikimedia main skin [...]
result in big returns in donation" has been extensively researched in not
only the academic literature but by major online advertisers such as Google.
Since there are so many parameters that could potentially be tweaked th
(As this email may enact changes that affect the total Wikimedia
community, please feel free to forward or post this email on any and all
applicable lists. I would like as much feedback as possible.)
Wikimedians--
We have begun exploring ideas for enhancing the visibility of the donate
button
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Michael Snow wrote:
> Pedro Sanchez wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Pharos >wrote:
> >
> >> Of course, there are and always have been a wide range of free content
> >> licenses used for images on Commons, not just GFDL and CC.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
2009/6/24 Michael Snow :
> Pedro Sanchez wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Pharos wrote:
>>
>>> Of course, there are and always have been a wide range of free content
>>> licenses used for images on Commons, not just GFDL and CC.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Pharos
>>>
>> OTRS doesn't handle only
Pedro Sanchez wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Pharos wrote:
>
>> Of course, there are and always have been a wide range of free content
>> licenses used for images on Commons, not just GFDL and CC.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Pharos
>>
> OTRS doesn't handle only commons.
>
> This meant wik
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Pharos wrote:
>
> Of course, there are and always have been a wide range of free content
> licenses used for images on Commons, not just GFDL and CC.
>
> Thanks,
> Pharos
>
OTRS doesn't handle only commons.
This meant wikipedia's text
__
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:57 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/6/24 Pedro Sanchez :
>
> > With the license move...
> > do we still accept GFDL-only material?
> > I've seen OTRSer today accepting and tagging entries released as GFDL
> only.
>
>
> Is this images for Commons? I'd personally like to de
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:57 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/6/24 Pedro Sanchez :
>
> > With the license move...
> > do we still accept GFDL-only material?
> > I've seen OTRSer today accepting and tagging entries released as GFDL
> only.
>
>
> Is this images for Commons? I'd personally like to de
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:57 AM, David Gerard wrote:
> 2009/6/24 Pedro Sanchez :
>
>> With the license move...
>> do we still accept GFDL-only material?
>> I've seen OTRSer today accepting and tagging entries released as GFDL only.
>
>
> Is this images for Commons? I'd personally like to deprecate
2009/6/24 Pedro Sanchez :
> With the license move...
> do we still accept GFDL-only material?
> I've seen OTRSer today accepting and tagging entries released as GFDL only.
Is this images for Commons? I'd personally like to deprecate the GFDL,
but if it's a Commons-accepted free content licence t
With the license move...
do we still accept GFDL-only material?
I've seen OTRSer today accepting and tagging entries released as GFDL only.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/l
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:52 AM, Mark Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:41 AM, Gerard
>> There are a number of languages that are being verified. For one of them it
>> is likely that we will ask approval within the week.
>
> This is fantastic news, I look forward to the announcement.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 2:41 AM, Gerard
Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> There are a number of languages that are being verified. For one of them it
> is likely that we will ask approval within the week.
This is fantastic news, I look forward to the announcement.
> When I speak for myself, the facthas be
Hoi,
There are a number of languages that are being verified. For one of them it
is likely that we will ask approval within the week.
When I speak for myself, the facthas been that the biggest struggle has been
getting the new projects actually created. I find that as a consequence my
motivation h
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 9:20 AM, Mark Williamson wrote:
> Whatever happened to the language committee? No new languages have
> been created or even approved for creation in a very long time with
> only two exceptions for Wikipedias - the Egyptian Arabic WP in
> November and the Pontic WP in March.
Whatever happened to the language committee? No new languages have
been created or even approved for creation in a very long time with
only two exceptions for Wikipedias - the Egyptian Arabic WP in
November and the Pontic WP in March. There are no list archives posted
since January, and the last ti
23 matches
Mail list logo
