[Foundation-l] Project Proposal: WikiGuide

Please consider this proposal for the WikiGuide project: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiGuide The goal of WikiGuide is to be a place for valid information that can't be accepted at other WikiMedia sites due to various quality guidelines, and to clarify some of the more confusing articles in

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

Hi, I prefer to write emails following rules similar to what MZMcBride pointed at the beginning of this topic, mainly because it is how I like to read other people emails - tho unfortunately a few people do so. I use gmail, because I like its features and I don't care about privacy issues, but I b

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

In a message dated 3/30/2010 8:37:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time, mnemo...@gmail.com writes: > Which free license is being used here with regard to the right to use > true > names? GFDL? CC-BY-SA?>> What I'm suggesting is that regardless of which license we decide to use as a project, an editor

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

George Herbert wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > >> [...] >> And therefore if the Wikimedia logos are used with permission on >> Wikimedia-hosted projects, the earth will crack open, and dogs and cats will >> start living together openly. >> > > Please stop usi

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:16 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:58 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: >> >> The purpose of defining "free" is to ensure that there will be no >> problem *for unknown reuse scenarios in the future*, _and_ to prevent >> a proliferation of individually cra

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

WJhonson writes: > I'm going to disagree with this claim. Are you suggesting that in order to > write an article about a living person, a reporter would need their license > to do so? Not at all. I'm pointing out, though, that there are all sorts of potential and actual rights embedded in cont

[Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Wednesday, March 31, 2010, Mike Godwin wrote: > > Thank you for recognizing that there are no *known* scenarios in which the > current use of Wikimedia-owned images would be a problem. I can't imagine > any either. Consider a re-user displaying article contents including, for example, an inter

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:16 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > You're suggesting using a specific, proprietary > client (that has all sorts of privacy issues) in order to combat what is, > at > its core, laziness. > Every great software application has, at its core, laziness. __

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:16 PM, Svip wrote: > A: Because it ruins the way people read. > Q: Why is topposting bad? > Is bottom posting any better? > Is bottom posting any better? No, not really. >> Is bottom posting any better? > No, not really. Why not? >>> Is bottom posting any better? >>

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

Chad wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:41 PM, MZMcBride wrote: >> Hello -- >> >> Some of the people posting to this mailing list don't seem to understand how >> to write a decent, readable reply to a mailing list thread... >> > > What possible good did you see coming from this thread? You > /k

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

2010/3/30 John Vandenberg : > I would prefer that Sv.Wp make an exception for WMF logos being used > in conjunction with interwiki links, such as on > sv:template:wikisource.  To me, those uses are part of the UI of the > project, and fall under fair use of the trademark. > > However, I've seen thi

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:58 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: > > The purpose of defining "free" is to ensure that there will be no > problem *for unknown reuse scenarios in the future*, _and_ to prevent > a proliferation of individually crafted licenses for each case. > Thank you for recognizing that

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

In a message dated 3/30/2010 6:50:58 PM Pacific Daylight Time, mgod...@wikimedia.org writes: > I keep pointing out, of course, that there's lots of material in Swedish > Wikipedia that's not freely licensed -- for example, the names of Living > Persons or the true names of contributors who choos

[Foundation-l] Logo Copyright

Klaus Graf writes: Nobody can be in doubt that the Volvo Logo isn't copyrighted at least > in the US. Of course they can. Plenty of letterform-based designs are copyrighted in the United States. > If attorneys are confusing trademark and copyright > protection Wikimedia counsel should not imit

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:55 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: >> >> The Swedish Wikipedia has drawn a line in the sand that all content in >> article space should meet the definition of "free >> content".[http://freedomdefined.org/] > > I agree

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 5:10 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: >[...] > And therefore if the Wikimedia logos are used with permission on > Wikimedia-hosted projects, the earth will crack open, and dogs and cats will > start living together openly. Please stop using this example. You're living in California

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:55 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: > > The Swedish Wikipedia has drawn a line in the sand that all content in > article space should meet the definition of "free > content".[http://freedomdefined.org/] I agree that they've been drawing a line in the sand, all right. > Th

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

Chad wrote: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:41 PM, MZMcBride wrote: >> Hello -- >> >> Some of the people posting to this mailing list don't seem to understand how >> to write a decent, readable reply to a mailing list thread... >> > > What possible good did you see coming from this thread? You > /kne

[Foundation-l] Logo Copyright

> Message: 10 > Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:37:38 -0700 > From: Mike Godwin > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia >        logos > Do you now accept that it is quite possible that this logo could be >> appropriately tagged as PD and its use in Sv.Wp articles is congrue

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 5:16 PM, Svip wrote: > Indeed, posting on a mailinglist is all about respect for the other > clients.  And boosting your own client as superior and thus not > needing to bother with etiquette seems a bit... ignorant or arrogant. > I can understand people not being aware of

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:41 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > Hello -- > > Some of the people posting to this mailing list don't seem to understand how > to write a decent, readable reply to a mailing list thread... > What possible good did you see coming from this thread? You /knew/ it would produce a bun

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Dan Rosenthal wrote: > .. > Nobody forces you to read their posts. Hmm. I remember that argument being used to assert that there was no problem with foundation-l. [[meta:Improving Foundation-l]] -- John ___ foundati

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On 31 March 2010 01:53, Dan Rosenthal wrote: > Assuming that other people care about ones own form of mailing choice is > crap also, as far as this list is concerned. Let people do as they choose. > Nobody forces you to read their posts. Hm, I am starting to get swayed by this 'top posting' princ

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:31 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: >> >> In your earlier comment, which you have now snipped, you asserted that >> Sv.Wp was doing the wrong thing: >> >> "I hope no one thinks Swedish Wikipedians (or anyone else) is f

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

Assuming that other people care about ones own form of mailing choice is crap also, as far as this list is concerned. Let people do as they choose. Nobody forces you to read their posts. On Mar 30, 2010 7:45 PM, wrote: Top posting is not what *creates* the crap. Copying the entire email is a sta

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On 31 March 2010 01:45, wrote: > Personally I don't want to scroll down through a 200 word email just to see > "me too" at the very bottom. The opposite of 'top-posting' is 'bottom-posting', which is actually equally bad in my mind, as it creates that exact problem. There are two decent methods

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

Top posting is not what *creates* the crap. Copying the entire email is a standard setting in some clients (toggleable) and an optional setting in others (toggleable) and probably there are some which don't let you select to do that, or undo it either! Personally I don't want to scroll down thro

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On 31/03/10 00:23, Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 31 March 2010 00:15, John Vandenberg wrote: > >> Of course I can read my email via gmail.com, which hides the "crap", >> however that is not ideal when I want to read my email and compose >> responses while I am offline. >> > Get Gmail Offline

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:31 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: > > In your earlier comment, which you have now snipped, you asserted that > Sv.Wp was doing the wrong thing: > > "I hope no one thinks Swedish Wikipedians (or anyone else) is free to > reuse the Volvo logo > without a license." > Not quite

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 31 March 2010 00:15, John Vandenberg wrote: >> Of course I can read my email via gmail.com, which hides the "crap", >> however that is not ideal when I want to read my email and compose >> responses while I am offline. > > Get Gmail Offl

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 37-01--10 03:59 PM, John Doe wrote: > I agree top posting tends to be the most effective method for handling > mailing lists > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Gerard Meijssen > wrote: >> The easiest way to deal with such issues is use a decent m

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 10:13 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:03 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: >> >> Are you saying that the PD tag on this page is incorrect? >> >> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Volvo_logo.svg > > Oh, I'm saying something much more lawyerly than that

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On 31 March 2010 00:15, John Vandenberg wrote: > Of course I can read my email via gmail.com, which hides the "crap", > however that is not ideal when I want to read my email and compose > responses while I am offline. Get Gmail Offline, then! (You turn it on somewhere in preferences.) It uses Go

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

Gerard Meijssen wrote: > The easiest way to deal with such issues is use a decent mail client. No. Writing an inline reply and cutting out the cruft is supported by every client, everywhere, always. You're suggesting using a specific, proprietary client (that has all sorts of privacy issues) in or

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On 31 March 2010 01:12, Andrew Garrett wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Gerard Meijssen > wrote: >> Hoi, >> The easiest way to deal with such issues is use a decent mail client. I use >> Gmail and it ensures that all the threads are together and in order. It >> hides all the copies of ol

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > The easiest way to deal with such issues is use a decent mail client. I use > Gmail and it ensures that all the threads are together and in order. It > hides all the copies of old replies and given the copious amount of storage > it

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 4:03 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: > > > Are you saying that the PD tag on this page is incorrect? > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Volvo_logo.svg > Oh, I'm saying something much more lawyerly than that -- I'm saying I don't know whether Volvo would accept the decl

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > The easiest way to deal with such issues is use a decent mail client. I use > Gmail and it ensures that all the threads are together and in order. It > hides all the copies of old replies and given the copious amount of storage > it

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > (Resent with correct subject header) > > John Vandenberg writes: > > >> By the way, check out . ?I hope no one >> > thinks Swedish Wikipedians (or anyone else) is free to reuse the Volvo >> logo >> > without

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

I agree top posting tends to be the most effective method for handling mailing lists On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > The easiest way to deal with such issues is use a decent mail client. I use > Gmail and it ensures that all the threads are together and in order.

Re: [Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

Hoi, The easiest way to deal with such issues is use a decent mail client. I use Gmail and it ensures that all the threads are together and in order. It hides all the copies of old replies and given the copious amount of storage it is no problem that all the crap is still there. When you argue tha

[Foundation-l] How to reply to a mailing list thread

Hello -- Some of the people posting to this mailing list don't seem to understand how to write a decent, readable reply to a mailing list thread. This makes for far more noise than signal, as people wade through six copies of the foundation-l footer or eight old and irrelevant replies trying to fi

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

This is a thread that accidentally became off-list due to a wrong reply-to header. Mike Godwin hett schreven: > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Marcus Buck wrote: > > Mike Godwin hett schreven: > > > On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Marcus Buck wrote: > > > > Mike Godwin hett schreven:

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Dan Rosenthal wrote: > How is it logical for the Wikimedia Foundation, by way of volunteers > supporting the Wikimedia Foundation, be disallowed from having their own > logo on their own website? > > In what universe is this logical? > > The problem with use of co

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Robert Rohde wrote: > 2010/3/30 Delphine Ménard : >>> That is the website UI, which is not content.  They could say that the >>> UI should also be completely "free" of copyrighted works.  IMO that >>> would be going overboard. >> >> >> If that is the case, while I

[Foundation-l] Strategic Planning Office Hours

Hi everyone - Sorry for the late notice. Our next strategic planning office hours will be: 04:00-05:00 UTC, Wednesday, 31 March. Local timezones can be checked at http://timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?year=2010&month=3&day=31&hour=04&min=0&sec=0&p1=0 As always, you can access the c

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

2010/3/30 Delphine Ménard : >> That is the website UI, which is not content.  They could say that the >> UI should also be completely "free" of copyrighted works.  IMO that >> would be going overboard. > > > If that is the case, while I understand and actually respect the > decision not to use Wiki

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

How is it logical for the Wikimedia Foundation, by way of volunteers supporting the Wikimedia Foundation, be disallowed from having their own logo on their own website? In what universe is this logical? The problem with use of copyrighted/trademarked logos is the concern that the owner of that

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 8:25 AM, John Vandenberg wrote: > 2010/3/30 Delphine Ménard : >> ... >> This means that Wikimedia logos are now _not used_ in the Swedish >> Wikipedia to illustrate articles on the Wikimedia projects, I suppose. >> Right? >> >> But as I understood Lennart's first email, I t

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Dan Rosenthal wrote: > > We want to use a bare minimum of unfree content, wherever possible. That is > not the same as NO unfree content. It does not follow that because we cannot > have ZERO unfree content, than we should be able to use everyone elses unfree >

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

> Why should we > reuse our own unfree logo and not others unfree logos. We aim to creat > a free encyclopedia that can be freely reused. What is rational about taking a scenario to the extreme? We want to use a bare minimum of unfree content, wherever possible. That is not the same as NO unfre

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

(Resent with correct subject header) John Vandenberg writes: > By the way, check out . ?I hope no one > > thinks Swedish Wikipedians (or anyone else) is free to reuse the Volvo > logo > > without a license. > > That image is in the PD as it does not meet the t

Re: [Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 72, Issue 63

John Vandenberg writes: > By the way, check out . ?I hope no one > > thinks Swedish Wikipedians (or anyone else) is free to reuse the Volvo > logo > > without a license. > > That image is in the PD as it does not meet the threshold of > originality. Why do the

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

The thread is interesting. What sv. did is, from my perspective, applying the same rules to Wikimedia logos that applies to all the other logos. Wich is just rational for me. Not that I agree, just it's rational. Wikipedia should be made of free contents, logos are not free, they remove the logos

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:42 AM, Andre Engels wrote: > > > This is exactly right. If we had no copyright or trademark restrictions > on > > the Wikimedia logos and marks, it would be trivial for proprietary > vendors > > to use the unrestricted logos in association with unfree content. > > But h

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 5:28 PM, MZMcBride wrote: > Mike Godwin wrote: >> Darn it! A waste, I say! And I worked so hard to give you >> . > > Huh, neat. I'm not sure there was an announcement about that, but it's nice > to know it's there! I do

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

>> > > Hmm. It could be uploaded under cc-by-sa (3.0) by > > user:This_logo_is_one_of_the_official_logos_used_by_the_Wikimedia_Foundation > > with OTRS ticket > > They could, but that doesn't make it right. If someone uploads this > image under cc-by-sa that would be just as much copyright viol

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:10 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > It's crazy. sv.wiki still has "unfree" logo on every page :) >> It is "unfree" to protect wiki identity. >> > > This is exactly right.  If we had no copyright or trademark restrictions on > the Wikimedia logos and marks, it would be trivial fo

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Przykuta wrote: >> > Or just use common sense that it's silly for a Wikimedia project to say >> > it's >> > not allowed to use a logo own by Wikimedia Foundation >> >> It is not "common sense" to depend on the relationship between the >> project and the hosti

Re: [Foundation-l] Swedish Wikipedians removes Wikimedia logos

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 2:36 AM, The Cunctator wrote: > No, this is a profoundly stupid decision that has no logical sense. A "free" > license is a copyright license. So? What does that have to do with the post you are quoting, or anything else in this thread? > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 6:11 PM,