I have read your proposal. I continue to be of the opinion that we are
not competent to do this. Since the proposal says, that "this project
requires as much database management knowledge as librarian
knowledge," it confirms my opinion. You will never merge the data
properly if you do not understa
on Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Everton Zanella
Alvarenga wrote:
> How do we know this picture is the 5th million?
According to the description this is from an oppositional newspaper
calling for more democracy in the absolute monarchy of Denmark. Isn't
it a great coincidence that the 5th million me
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Cary Bass wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> [mailto:foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
>> Of Nikola Smolenski
>> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 6:33 AM
>> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailin
Hello, I have already answered some of these arguments earlier.
David Goodman wrote:
> Not only can the OpenLibrary do it perfect well without us.
> considering our rather inconsistent standards, they can probably do it
> better without us. We will just get in the way.
The issue is not if OpenLi
> -Original Message-
> From: foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
> [mailto:foundation-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf
> Of Nikola Smolenski
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2009 6:33 AM
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Commons reaches 5
Lars Aronsson wrote:
> Yann Forget wrote:
>
>> I started a proposal on the Strategy Wiki:
>> http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Building_a_database_of_all_books_ever_published
>>
>> IMO this should be a join project between Openlibrary and Wikimedia.
>
> Again, I don't understand why. W
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:32 PM, Everton Zanella
Alvarenga wrote:
> How do we know this picture is the 5th million?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#5.000.000
And again, this is just a guess by Platonides. Apparently it could also be:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:So
Mathias Schindler wrote:
>>From a PR perspective, taking this image as the 5millionth one is a
> desaster, the only positive aspect is that it is "honest" to take that
> one instead of a shiny picture.
Perhaps not so much, as it happened to be a first page of the newspaper.
And I guess it is stil
How do we know this picture is the 5th million?
Just for curiosity, does anyone know what is the scanned paper about?
[]'s,
Tom
--
http://blogdotom.wordpress.com/sobre
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https
Hello,
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:18 PM, Mathias
Schindler wrote:
>
> From a PR perspective, taking this image as the 5millionth one is a
> desaster, the only positive aspect is that it is "honest" to take that
> one instead of a shiny picture.
Nah, we can use it to make a case for Wikisource and e
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 3:03 PM, effe iets
anders wrote:
> works fine here...
The broken version was reverted, it is now working again. In case you
want to test it, see the version history or get the following file:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/a/af/20090902125937!Kj%C3%B8b
effe iets anders wrote:
> works fine here...
That's b/c the image was reverted. See file history.
> 2009/9/2 Mathias Schindler
>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Hay (Husky) wrote:
>>> Around 11:46 UTC we reached 5 million files on Commons! Not quite sure
>>> which file is the 5th million, but t
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 10:58 PM, Mathias
Schindler wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Hay (Husky) wrote:
>> Around 11:46 UTC we reached 5 million files on Commons! Not quite sure
>> which file is the 5th million, but this is one of the candidates:
>>
>> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:
works fine here...
2009/9/2 Mathias Schindler
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Hay (Husky) wrote:
> > Around 11:46 UTC we reached 5 million files on Commons! Not quite sure
> > which file is the 5th million, but this is one of the candidates:
> >
> >
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kj%
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 2:53 PM, Hay (Husky) wrote:
> Around 11:46 UTC we reached 5 million files on Commons! Not quite sure
> which file is the 5th million, but this is one of the candidates:
>
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kj%C3%B8benhavnsposten_28_nov_1838_side_1.jpg
Does anyone else
Around 11:46 UTC we reached 5 million files on Commons! Not quite sure
which file is the 5th million, but this is one of the candidates:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kj%C3%B8benhavnsposten_28_nov_1838_side_1.jpg
Thanks everyone for making Commons such as a fantastic project, and
creatin
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 1:18 AM, Mark Williamson wrote:
> It's more complex than that I think.
>
> "mo" was deleted from the list of ISO codes relatively recently; when
> the Wiki was created it was a valid ISO code.
>
>
> Like I said, it is a complex issue. Also, from what I have heard (and
> thi
Not only can the OpenLibrary do it perfect well without us.
considering our rather inconsistent standards, they can probably do it
better without us. We will just get in the way.
There is sufficient missing material in every Wikipedia, sufficient
lack of coverage of areas outside the primary lan
No, they most certainly would not. However it's a bit of a moot point
as if I recall correctly there were only 1 or 2 admins and they've
both left since.
Mark
On 9/1/09, Peter Gervai wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 08:29, Mark Williamson wrote:
>> It certainly should, ideally, be the same Wikipe
19 matches
Mail list logo
