Re: [Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 75, Issue 110

Do u have kids? foundation-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote: >Send foundation-l mailing list submissions to > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >or, via email, se

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

Michael Snow wrote: > Victor Vasiliev wrote: > >> On 06/24/2010 10:20 AM, Michael Snow wrote: >> >>> 4. We do expect material in our projects to be educational in nature, >>> and any material that is not educational should be removed. >> I still believe such a sta

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

David Gerard wrote: > On 24 June 2010 19:28, Michael Snow wrote: > >> That's the meaning, definitely, same as it was in the previous board >> statement. I would observe, too, that for material on user pages, if >> you're even going to ask whether it's educational, what is it going to >> educate

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource and reCAPTCHA

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > I love those proofreading features, and the new default layout for a > book's pages and TOC.  Wikisource is becoming AWESOME. > > Do we have PGDP contributors who can weigh on on how similar the > processes are?  Is there a way for us to actua

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Birgitte, what I am discussing is whether or no t I see any merit in this idea at all. Thanks. On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Birgitte SB wrote: > > > --- On Thu, 6/24/10, Milos Rancic wrote: > >> From: Milos Rancic >> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

--- On Thu, 6/24/10, Milos Rancic wrote: > From: Milos Rancic > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one > Wikipedia" > To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" > Date: Thursday, June 24, 2010, 6:06 PM > On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:26 AM, > Mark Williamson > wr

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > The fact that 10 years old child probably doesn't know what density > means, doesn't mean that she or he can't read about that on > encyclopedia. Of course. Children who specialize in a topic often make excellent teachers, and sometimes feat

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource and reCAPTCHA

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 11:16 AM, James Forrester wrote: > On 24 June 2010 15:37, Samuel Klein wrote: >> I love those proofreading features, and the new default layout for a >> book's pages and TOC.  Wikisource is becoming AWESOME. > > Ahem. Even more awesome, you mean. :-) It used to be just lo

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:26 AM, Mark Williamson wrote: > as if we were dumb. I have heard (and I am not an expert) from many > people the idea that you will get what you give, meaning that if you > treat an adolescent as if they were a criminal, they will often become > a criminal; it seems to m

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

I would like to add: The internal links used on our projects help avoid many of the problems of not understanding something. As a 13 year old reader of Wikipedia some seven years ago, if I did not understand something, I could always click on the link to a page that would explain it to me. If I we

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Benjamin Lees wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: >>> >>> If you don't have a strong background in a field then drinking from >>> the fire hose of full-complexity concepts is

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Miloš, I am inclined to agree with you. As someone who is not so far removed from his own adolescence, I can attest that I've always found "Children's writing" to be incredibly condescending and even demeaning. Perhaps I was not a typical child, but ever since about 7 years of age I really hated t

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Benjamin Lees wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote: >> >> If you don't have a strong background in a field then drinking from >> the fire hose of full-complexity concepts is hard no matter if you are >> a child or not. If you do have a r

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 24 June 2010 15:04, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > > - Scope and name: Maybe it would practically make no big difference > > whether the project is called "simple" or "for kids". Poor readers and > > adult beginning readers (natives or not) tend

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > I strongly disagree. There is a big difference between simple language > and simple concepts. Children need simple concepts (basically, you > can't assume as much prior knowledge because they haven't had time to > learn things that adults con

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On 24 June 2010 15:04, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > - Scope and name: Maybe it would practically make no big difference > whether the project is called "simple" or "for kids". Poor readers and > adult beginning readers (natives or not) tend to read texts that are > meant for children anyway. It could ma

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

On 24 June 2010 19:50, Victor Vasiliev wrote: > On 06/24/2010 10:40 PM, Michael Snow wrote: >> I recommend that people not confuse "educational" with "pedagogical" or >> try to divorce its interpretation from the context of the particular >> project. Historical records have educational value, for

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

On 24 June 2010 20:13, David Goodman wrote: > If education is learning about the world, there is essentially nothing > that can not be considered as having at least  potential educational > value.  There are of course different degrees of educational value, > but using it by itself as a criterion

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: >> finding relevant pedagogues who would lead child contributors. > > That's a fine idea.  Also finding active middle- and high-school > students interested in leading such a project.  Ther

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hi Milos, On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > Writing dumb articles because of thinking that children are dumb is > dumb. And not just dumb, but deeply ageist and discriminatory. I don't think that either simplified or children's projects should be "dumbed down". Ottava's es

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Ting Chen wrote: > *Earth* (or *the Earth*) is the third planet > from the Sun > , the fifth-largest and the densest of > the eight planets in the Solar System >

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

If education is learning about the world, there is essentially nothing that can not be considered as having at least potential educational value. There are of course different degrees of educational value, but using it by itself as a criterion is much too simplistic. (In the context of pornograp

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > - Create new Wikipedias, or a new project: What would make sense? If > they were new Wikipedias, we would potentially double the list with > interwiki links ("in other languages"). I prefer a new project. One way to handle interlanguage l

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hello Ziko, hello Milos, some time ago, when the board was discussing about the sexual content problems I made the following proposal. I didn't published it because I feel it still very premature and also because I wanted to wait for the research work that Sue should do and see what the experts

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

On 06/24/2010 10:40 PM, Michael Snow wrote: > I recommend that people not confuse "educational" with "pedagogical" or > try to divorce its interpretation from the context of the particular > project. Historical records have educational value, for example, even > when those records are not created f

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource and PGDP

--- On Thu, 6/24/10, James Forrester wrote: > > IME, PGDP's processes are /seriously/ heavy-weight, burning > lots of > worker time on 2nd or even 3rd-level passes, and multiple > tiers of > work (Proofreading, Formatting, and all the special > management levels > for people running projects

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

Victor Vasiliev wrote: > On 06/24/2010 10:20 AM, Michael Snow wrote: > >> 4. We do expect material in our projects to be educational in nature, >> >>> and any material that is not educational should be removed. >>> > I still believe such a statement imply that most of Wikisource con

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

On 24 June 2010 19:28, Michael Snow wrote: > That's the meaning, definitely, same as it was in the previous board > statement. I would observe, too, that for material on user pages, if > you're even going to ask whether it's educational, what is it going to > educate people about? That particular

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

Thomas Dalton wrote: > On 24 June 2010 19:08, geni wrote: > >> On 24 June 2010 07:20, Michael Snow wrote: >> 4. We do expect material in our projects to be educational in nature, and any material that is not educational should be removed. >> I would suggest that pa

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 2:41 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > Hello, > > Recently there has been a controversy on Wikipedia in German about > extra articles in simple language. Authors of its medical group wanted > to create sub pages suitable for children, believing in an urgent > need. [1] > > In the

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

On 06/24/2010 10:20 AM, Michael Snow wrote: > 4. We do expect material in our projects to be educational in nature, >> and any material that is not educational should be removed. I still believe such a statement imply that most of Wikisource content will have to be deleted if remove all "non-edu

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

On 24 June 2010 19:08, geni wrote: > On 24 June 2010 07:20, Michael Snow wrote: >>> 4. We do expect material in our projects to be educational in nature, >>> and any material that is not educational should be removed. > > I would suggest that passing a resolution that outlaws most user pages > is

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Board resolution commissioning study and recommendations

On 24 June 2010 07:20, Michael Snow wrote: >> 4. We do expect material in our projects to be educational in nature, >> and any material that is not educational should be removed. I would suggest that passing a resolution that outlaws most user pages is a bad idea. -- geni _

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Aaron Adrignola wrote: > It may be relevant to note that http://wikijunior.org currently redirects > to http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior . > > From what I've heard, Wikijunior was supposed to become its own separate > project at some point.  Now, that is Wi

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

2010/6/24 Gerard Meijssen > When you are going to consider simple Wikipedias for all languages, please > also consider how we will deal with different orthographies.. A child of 10 > speaking Portuguese will have considerably more problems reading either the > South American or the European varian

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 9:33 AM, Aaron Adrignola wrote: > It may be relevant to note that http://wikijunior.org currently redirects > to http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior . > > From what I've heard, Wikijunior was supposed to become its own separate > project at some point.  Now, that is Wik

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

It may be relevant to note that http://wikijunior.org currently redirects to http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior . >From what I've heard, Wikijunior was supposed to become its own separate project at some point. Now, that is Wikibooks-related and not Wikipedia-related, but if one were looking

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hoi, A great idea, but let us not forget: بسيط պարզ უბრალო פשוט 簡単な 간 단한 прост 简单 łatwy எளிய సరళమైన ง่าย or mộc mạc. We could even be bold and have a complete URL in the scripts of these languages.. I have been in favour for us to research this for a long time.. When you are going to cons

Re: [Foundation-l] encouraging women's participation

Дана Wednesday 23 June 2010 18:27:43 Nikola Smolenski написа: > Anyway, I made this so anyone who would like to experiment, can. > http://toolserver.org/~nikola/snrss.php I see that people who tried it either haven't written any new articles recently or have encountered a bug (on non-English Wiki

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

On 24 June 2010 15:52, Pharos wrote: > What about wikipediajr.org ? > > And so we would have en.wikipediajr.org, fr.wikipediajr.org etc. Or even just a modifier - jr.en.wikipedia.org jr.de.wikipedia.org ...to which we could also alias "simple", "kinder", etc etc. This helps emphasise the disti

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

I may suggest two easy ways how it may be solved technically: * Introduction of a special namespace on a "larger" Wikipedia. * Introduction of s subdomain (e.g. simple.de.wikipedia.org) with shared admins (that should be simple with SUL). I believe there is no need for seperate set of admins for s

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource and reCAPTCHA

On 24 June 2010 15:37, Samuel Klein wrote: > I love those proofreading features, and the new default layout for a > book's pages and TOC.  Wikisource is becoming AWESOME. Ahem. Even more awesome, you mean. :-) > Do we have PGDP contributors who can weigh on on how similar the > processes are?  I

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Samuel J Klein wrote: > Overall, we've never decided whether a "simple" or "children's > encyclopedia" should be a separate project with its own root domain, > or another set of 'languages' that show up as an interlanguage link or > as FOO.wikipedia.org . > I don't think we've even decided those

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

What about wikipediajr.org ? And so we would have en.wikipediajr.org, fr.wikipediajr.org etc. Thanks, Pharos On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 10:04 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > Thanks for your very useful thoughts, Samuel. They lead us to these > two key questions: > > - Create new Wikipedias, or a new pr

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikisource and reCAPTCHA

I love those proofreading features, and the new default layout for a book's pages and TOC. Wikisource is becoming AWESOME. Do we have PGDP contributors who can weigh on on how similar the processes are? Is there a way for us to actually merge workflows with them? Prof. Greg Crane of The Perseus

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Thanks for your very useful thoughts, Samuel. They lead us to these two key questions: - Create new Wikipedias, or a new project: What would make sense? If they were new Wikipedias, we would potentially double the list with interwiki links ("in other languages"). I prefer a new project. - Scope a

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hoi, The language committee is tasked with other projects; for subsequent projects for a language there is a requirement for a complete localisation for that language and for a "substantial" sized content for that project. The rationale for this is that many projects were created because we could o

Re: [Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hi Ziko, On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: > In the discussion, the question of creating a Wikipedia in simple > German came up. This would be useful. > As we know, to-day Wikimedia language committee policies prohibit a > new Wikipedia in a language that already has a Wiki

[Foundation-l] Reconsidering the policy "one language - one Wikipedia"

Hello, Recently there has been a controversy on Wikipedia in German about extra articles in simple language. Authors of its medical group wanted to create sub pages suitable for children, believing in an urgent need. [1] In the discussion, the question of creating a Wikipedia in simple German cam

Re: [Foundation-l] English language dominationism is striking again

On 23 June 2010 21:31, Mariano Cecowski wrote: > --- El mié 23-jun-10, Michael Peel escribió: >> I always think than not using reCaptcha is a shame, as it's >> a nice way to get people to proofread text in a reasonably >> efficient way. It would be really nice if someone could >> create somethin

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Q&A regarding board resolution

On 24 Jun 2010, at 11:10, Milos Rancic wrote: > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Michael Snow wrote: >>> Does the board have consensus on what to do about >>> potentially-objectionable materials in the projects? >>> >>> No. So far, board members have exchanged several hundred e-mails on thi

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Q&A regarding board resolution

On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 8:21 AM, Michael Snow wrote: >> Does the board have consensus on what to do about >> potentially-objectionable materials in the projects? >> >> No. So far, board members have exchanged several hundred e-mails on this >> topic, and we will continue to discuss it in the comin