Already in hand :)
FT2
On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 1:29 AM, Kim Bruning wrote:
> I would like to thank Geoff Brigham for the excellent job he did analysing
> the consequences of SOPA for wikipedia.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative/Legal_overview
>
> Wo
eople get into".
However you label them, whatever means and venue we were to use, the third
of those is where the question mark goes.
FT2
On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> Sure; if the objective is to have comments by "people who are interested in
> the subj
Yes. I had thought about one option - a separate website entirely, purely
for people to chat about Wikimedia articles. But at a first glance that
dead ends for so many reasons.
FT2
2012/1/24 Johan Jönsson
> FT2:
>
> > - "costs" will be the distraction from w
ns (1) (2) and article editing as a result of patroling and other
needs of (3)
(And of course the standard of comparison could be "better of two evils".
For instance if the crystal ball says a wiki project dies due to fading
attention then maybe chat and patrolling is net harmful but less
o be
aligned to the public and avoid pressure (even if we wouldn't succumb).
That's our support. It means although we have some shared wishes and broad
alignments of interest, we must be very careful to think "outside the box"
somewhat on these issues. It's what we've
to
organize fundraising with a view to efficiently obtaining sufficient funds
for these possible future needs, and should do so in a manner compatible
with and balanced against the goals of our movement."
FT2
On Sat, Jan 21, 2012 at 12:26 PM, Joan Goma wrote:
> > From: Ilario V
I said to her when temporarily hired that the Foundation could not have
chosen anyone better for the role :)
She is superb.
FT2
On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 7:55 PM, Philippe Beaudette
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm thrilled to announce that Maggie Dennis, our community liaison, h
Point of information: - are proposals mooted for an alternative DNS root?
Presumably, since satellite proposals exist and those are even more radical.
FT2
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 5:20 PM, David Gerard wrote:
>
> Come the SOPAcalypse, the DNS root will fragment. I wonder if Google
> w
The question is, do you plan to migrate the major search engines and DNS
servers? If so, then migration might help.
FT2
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote:
> Next time we should just migrate and fork to a jurisdiction
> outside the US control. If that is
by X date" or "you might want to
close this by X date given politics"? Probably. Live and learn, consensus
was apparent and agreed, and.. yeah, the process could be smoother another
time. Maybe in another 11 years . :)
FT2
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 2:27 AM, George Herbert wrote:
n missed around 13 - 16
January was the closers deciding to close it in line with a technical
request from developers to allow them 48 hours and hence make a decision by
the 16th. There was a month when it was open before then.
FT2
___
fou
*"We have Putin! So they now try to beat us with SOPA!"*
Me neither :)
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> On the Russian Wikipedia, the banner is showing you
>
> (sorry, couldn't resist)
>
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundat
uld treat an eyeball, an arm, a cancer or a
method of DNA sequencing... and without us signalling it as "shameful" to
learn about by virtue of exclusion from equal handling.
I know which of these stances I respect more.
FT2
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 12:02 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> The Found
not at the
server) without actual access to their computer.
FT2
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 7:09 PM, wrote:
> In the unhappy event that this filter is enabled, will it be
> possible/allowed for a community to make its use mandatory and to
> "punish" readers who
A more plausible option is to make WMF more conspicuous. Right now it's
almost unknown that WP is part of a wider project.
"
An educational website of the Wikimedia Foundation"
[Button: "View all our projects in your language"]
FT2
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 9:33 PM, Tho
Predictable result - half the world gains the impression that Wikipedia has
been bought out / sold out.
FT2
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Fajro wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Ziko van Dijk
> wrote:
> > Hello, you can make Wikimedia as famous as Wikipedia, but
as "difficult" in those areas, once
established a few years down the line.
At least criteria are to be put in place now than never. For chapters in
good order they should not be an issue.
FT2
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 3:35 PM, Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> Hoi,
> There is fundraising together
I've had a go at some basic editing to the [[WP:OWN]] page to try and
explain a bit better, rather than simply saying "IF YOU EDIT, YOU DO NOT OWN
THE PAGE!" It still needs considerable work. Eyeballs and improvements...?
FT2
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Amir E. Ahar
well.
If the subject matter is valid, and there is something to say that makes an
entry useful, length is secondary, that can change over time.
FT2
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 2:17 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I wouldn't describe a short article as &quo
- a staff member
can comment on this - but the policy, rights, traditions, choice of license,
and endorsement of other sites doing so in practice, is our way of ensuring
a practical commitment is made.
FT2
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Fae wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm taking part in an
without other people being affected.
No surprises, much as anyone expected. Endorsement of not-very-contentious
conclusion.
FT2
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:52 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> On 1 June 2011 21:35, Nathan wrote:
>
> > Forgive me if I find these resolutions rather too
Information is educational. When I read Wikinews, it educates me as to
significant matters going on in the world, and provides other related
resources.
FT2
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:03 PM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> "Wikimedia projects are curated and edited collections, according to
&
I always took the central point about conflation to be the unwitting mixing
up of separate ideas - usually but not always to the mild confusion or
detriment of both.
FT2
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>
> > And Larry Sanger and Magnus may be remembered for pop
Indeed. The problem is we don't know. The survey doesn't ask what area they
use it, how often or rarely, or whether they used it "instead of" or "as
well as".
Different people may have different guesses how to interpret it. But we
don't know.
FT2
On Wed,
something, especially obscure areas, or when writing a professional
letter (eg to a professional magazine or colleague)
FT2
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Nathan wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Fred Bauder
> wrote:
> > "Across all markets a surprising 75% of docto
l=en&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESiQNeG1IBcuX-Tia-mM_mhaDtdHyHoxU5ce1TDLb2Mvm-aUgasm6kxWqglvKYI0WSzhXa-i6nmbtadbbVpt4BNSBzekfJpryNmPCFC7VzvyF42ZKeX7rENwP5uCUvC24dDfGzVl&sig=AHIEtbSKuqmmggNFiXz_hjIquy8QLluFlQ>indeed.
FT2
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> FT2, 01/06/2011 15
Endorse Foundation action on this obvious bad-faith domain which trades off
the name and domain of Wikipedia and the proportion of users who will
mis-spell it.
Is there a way to identify the most common other mis-spellings and how
common they are?
FT2
On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:40 PM, HW wrote
ot;nice" is to say things that provide unlikely
expectations that will eventually be dashed. For example, agreeing with a
perception that I didn't find accurate because it would please you.
FT2
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> Thank you guys. I
ctivities. Imagine people
browsing google.com, apple.com, microsoft.com, and suddenly for an extended
period getting "server not found" with nothing more of explanation, no
details, no idea when they can use the site again (minutes? days?) or if it
will repeat. The impact is similar for Wikimedi
As a non-tech, don't all reads (at least) pass through the squids, so we can
identify and report in a nice way a lot of connection errors at that point?
FT2
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 2:18 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
> There are dozens of places where error messages are generated. It
" means we have that kind of use, perception, stature -- and a
similar scale of response within the general public if it suddenly doesn't
work. Most members of the public do not have the insight you or I would.
FT2
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Austin Hair wrote:
> On Wed,
In future can I have vanilla and strawberry with that? :)
FT2
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Domas Mituzas wrote:
> In future we will have five nines availability and no downtimes will
> happen.
>
>
___
foundation-l mailing list
I don't get this.
Would it be possible in future, if the sites are unresponsive, or will be
unresponsive due to planned maintenance, to establish a fallback that simply
displays an explanatory status message to the public?
FT2
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Tim Starling wrote:
&g
less.
Instead of complaining, you might like to notice how your own attitudes lead
to fairly predictable results, and a genuine, noticeable and enduring change
of them changes the results.
FT2
On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 4:34 AM, Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> Furthermore, if someone, under
ort, thank us, understand they are being consulted on any
issues they notice, and try to help.
Maybe we can design a possible email, experiment on a couple of batches of
30 - 50 newly created and older BLPs, and see what happens?
FT2
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Thomas Morton wrote:
&
n any "keepable" BLP, or a minute's web searching.
A few may need Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, but I suspect not many. Only a
very small minority will not be easily identified with a means of email or
other direct contact within a few minutes.
Worth it, I think.
FT2
On Mon, May
sn't change this.
Can we somehow engage better with subjects?
FT2
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
ame content standards as other
content. Not really inclined to endorse defeatism.
FT2
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 10:08 PM, Sarah wrote:
> We could solve that by hosting only BLPs that have already had
> encyclopedic or extensive treatment elsewhere, i.e. have already been
> the su
tes and smaller ones how the legal knots are tied) or worrying
(because of the severity it implies) in copyright terms..
FT2
On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 7:28 PM, wrote:
> One might want to factor in a Google News Case in Belgium that dealt
> with which laws apply where:
> http
/ the
jurisdiction you were in when you took the alleged breaking action, or 4/
the ability of local legal process to access you, in deciding what's legally
actionable?
Lawyers welcomed :) Curiosity and enlightenment more than anything.
FT2
___
foundation
on vacation a while later?
Just curious which of these is litigable or in contempt, and which is not.
FT2
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
it
is US law that governs Wikimedia.
FT2
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 12:07 PM, wrote:
> Welcome to the problem of Orphan Works. what you have to show is that
> either of the following is true?
>
> (i) the author of which is a citizen of India; or
> (ii) which is first published in I
ic gain (just
attribution) was sought by the author, is not copyright law's main focus.
Deferring to lawyers on the list :)
FT2
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 6:13 PM, wrote:
> > get from that content is obtained from my work they have translated
> > without my permission?
> > Ho
"Oh gods yes.
+1
Ja ja
D'accord"
FT2
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Samuel Klein wrote:
> >> it's just not enabled on
> >> larger sites such as the English Wikipedia. It's being tracked by bug
> >> <https://bugzilla.wikimedia.o
mmary on that, and a link to the current policy.
Click OK to confirm if you mean to do this or HELP ME to talk to an
experienced user"*...
... *then* I will agree we are making progress.
FT2
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Sarah wrote:
> In fact a lot of those issues are spelled out very
on't gradually sooner or later gain wider
attention for that reason. I think that's a lesson most democratic countries
could learn from us, not the other way round.
*8 Scary thoughts aren't they?
*
No. I don't find them scary at all. Thanks for them.
FT2
On Sun, Apr 10
extra
expertize or to mediate a minor disagreement) would be worth noting for
future.
FT2
On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> I too loathe the wall of text displayed to new users and believe it is
> highly
> ineffective. Some possible solutions I though
I'm not seeing discussion of "chronically broken" code there. Just
discussion of redundant code (due to 1.17) and cleanup. Any chance of a
pointer to something that sums up the "chronically broken" nature of site
script?
FT2
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:41 PM, David Gerard
Thread title?
FT2
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 4:27 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> See the current thread on wikitech-l about how chronically broken
> most site JavaScript is and what to do about the problem
>
___
foundation-l mailing list
fou
e a more
modern style.
FT2
On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Sarah wrote:
> Do we know how many editors still use Monobook?
>
>
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Thumb placed on problem.
FT2
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:33 PM, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we ... forget that becoming part of the community is a process
> and state of mind rather than a
rd election
isn't really the context to do so.
FT2
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
> Not so quick - I am paying fees, for Wikimedia Nederland and Wikimedia
> Deutschland. Would you say that they are not Wikimedia?`:-)
>
___
quot;by
members for benefit of members". It exists on a voluntary basis for the
world as a whole, ie non-members (by that definition), and that is where our
focus should always ultimately end up.
FT2
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote:
> 2011/3/20 marcos :
> > I agree wi
t reach
as a byproduct. Not a big point but a "plus")
FT2
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 1:24 PM, Andre Engels wrote:
> I do also think giving people voting rights based only on
> being 'readers' basically means giving it out to random people.
>
_
de the fixed percentage of the total
vote given to readers (1/4? 1/3?), then however many readers vote, scale it
as the agreed proportion of the cast votes.
FT2
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
ly
know and focus on what the community cares about. Matters that the
community cares about will have received a specific comment from each
candidate. The community can compare candidates' views on specific issues
of wide interest, and vote based on the candidates' specific views on these.
0 by random poll
proportionately by country (after checking for obvious duplicates) and allow
them to vote. Again may be more trouble than it's worth, but it is
important to consider if readers may have a say in what matters at the
election. After all they are whom the project and all of our effo
ostile environment is mostly
a reflection of the divergence it involves.
FT2
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Fred Bauder wrote:
> It doesn't work. Even now, if you show up on some projects, create a new
> category, write a few new articles, you have to claw your way through
> nominat
a
means of better cross-wiki collaboration and flow of knowledge and support.
FT2
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 5:09 AM, brock.wel...@gmail.com <
brock.wel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with helping wikiprojects collaborate but couldn't disagree more
> with making them more power
the topic neutrally, ask about policy related issues, be
fair and courteous, etc.
FT2
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:
> > Are you suggesting something like a second, parallel arbcom if the
> > first has finally stalled?
>
> This was also a part of t
a system might well be a nice thing to have, but would be as
> effective in promoting good editing behaviour as a Barnstar.
>
> Not quite. A barnstar means one person, somewhere, wanted to say "well
done". It doesn't mean the user's work generally or their condu
The contradiction resolves in that "routinely" means "commonly" not
"automatically". Your 2nd paragraph says it -- a carrot that required the
acquisition of editorial skills that were within the reach of just about
anyone who applied herself, and which passed the scrutiny of the community
as good q
ell, and anyone can lose
by editing or behaving to a visibly poor standard. It carries no formal
powers, but by peer pressure alone encourages improvement generally.
Two ideas.
FT2
On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 10:13 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> --- On Sat, 26/2/11, John Vandenberg wrote:
>
ast 1/ the US govt is not the only such body (other groups receiving
federal funds?) and 2/ we ourselves have a genuine interest in ensuring we
think hard how those with disabilities experience Wikimedia in everyday use,
when creating our platform.
FT2
On Sun, Feb 20, 2011 at 7:51 AM, Ting Chen
Multiple licenses add benefit when they offer significant variant choices of
value to a licensor that other licenses don't offer. They reduce benefit
when they divide "free X" into proliferated mutually incompatible X's,
divided by use and reuse conditions that confuse or cause
pact. That's by *both admins
and non-admins* (no reason to give excess leeway to long term non-admins to
harm the project by discouraging bona-fide users, any more than we would
give excess leeway to long-term repeated mis-citers or persistent original
researchers).
FT2
On Sat, Feb 19,
veterans of internet wars. It's a habit. It can be learned,
and it can be expected, and it can happen here as well. You'd be surprised
how fast people learn when it's needed to do what they want.
FT2
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Marc Riddell wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 1
;foundation" - "globally" mean and what does it say about
how business partnerships will be selected, created or managed, decisions
made about them, and choices about resources used on them?
Without that kind of level of data it's not possible to say whether the
conceptual
t;Globally", or that Advocacy+lobbying/Groups is "Support groups", tells me
precisely zero of any value about any organizational matter, roles, work
needed, and so on.
Can someone expand this considerably? Thanks.
FT2
2011/2/18 Delphine Ménard
> Hi all,
>
> The Mo
discuss, who can be relied on
as their job to pass things on and ensure they don't lapse or get forgotten,
and to get answers when a routine ordinary question comes up, might be no
bad thing.
FT2
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:23 PM, Fred Bauder wrote:
>
> >
> > One suggestion I
s to be at the office and responsive
to the community on lists and wikis, ensure community questions and concerns
are addressed or not lost, where other staff may not be able to do so as
fully as some would wish. It'd cost, but it may well be worth it.
Worthwhile? Or wasteful?
FT2
On Thu, Feb 17, 2
focus and the work roles of those who contribute to the mission
by working as staff is the other.
Hope this is of use or interest. Peace.
FT2
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 5:00 AM, MZMcBride wrote:
> It's not about assuming that Wikimedia's positions are "wrong," tha
p://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/vpat-3.html
and
http://www.mozilla.org/access/section508
FT2
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Yes x 2.
But keep the links simple, so extended subdomains (en.wp.wmf.org) is too
long. Just one domain, and let the shortener cover all wikis not just one.
FT2
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:08 AM, Alison M. Wheeler <
wikime...@alisonwheeler.com> wrote:
> An alternative would be to c
People will want to link to permalinks.
8 chars, 64 character set (a-z A-Z 0-9 and 2 others). Unlikely to run out
for the foreseeable future.
FT2
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 11:26 AM, Jiri Hofman wrote:
> Since (26*2+10)**5 = 916132832 , five chars should be enough for all
> articles fo
any others on the open mailing list, but if the idea is
worth trying, I'm sure we'll find out to whom to send suggestions.
FT2
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:56 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
> David Gerard wrote:
> > On 11 February 2011 11:30, Mingli Yuan wrote:
> >> So I
wikis for the
kind of proposal you have. Perhaps set up a wiki on a wiki
farm<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki_farm>
?
FT2
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 3:29 AM, Ryan Lomonaco wrote:
> Forwarded to the whole list on behalf of a non-member.
>
> -- Forwarded message --
>
See "see also" etc in [[History of Wikipedia]].
FT2
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 7:27 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> FYI, there is an existing timeline at:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_timeline
>
> And lots of other wikipedia history pages on English, too.
>
&
Would prefer on its own wiki as this is comprehensive up to a given date.
Maybe January2001.wikipedia.org -- immediate impact.
(DNS software cannot handle 2001.wikipedia.org)
FT2
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 6:04 PM, phoebe ayers wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 7:54 AM, Tim Starling
>
Winrar's your best bet. Other archivers may be equally good.
FT2
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 5:53 PM, wrote:
> In a message dated 12/14/2010 8:21:09 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> steven.wall...@gmail.com writes:
>
>
> > This is fantastic, and the timing could not be better.
Wow, Tim. Just wow!
Is it just me who sees NYT carrying a headline, "On eve of 10th anniversary,
WIkipedia developers turn up earliest records" ?
FT2
On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
> I was looking through some old files in our SourceForge project. I
&g
or a few do, we decide first whether it meets our inclusion
criteria, then how to represent it if an article is viable. NPOV is not an
inclusion policy.
(*Reductio ad absurdum *version: - many articles are kept with just a
handful (<5) sources; this implies "mainstream" did not notice
d.
Individual users may wish to make a stand though. (without dragging WP/M
into it).
FT2
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:39 PM, aude wrote:
> On Dec 11, 2010, at 12:31 AM, Robert Tice wrote:
>
> > I suggest that use of Paypal is contraindicated due to their
> > deliberat
Sure (and in reply to your off-list mail, it's fine, easily done).
The questions seemed genuine and seeking a genuine explanation. If it's been
covered elsewhere that's good enough.
FT2
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Ryan Lomonaco wrote:
> FT2,
>
> Please let it go
he only person dealt with under a real name *by pt-arbcom*.
But nobody has said you were or weren't.
Hope this helps?
FT2
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 7:37 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> 1) No real names will be disclosed on this list on account of the request
> made.
>
> 2) No
possible. But if the user's username is their real name then it will be
named in the case for that reason.
FT2
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 2:53 PM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> I am not aware of cases on English Wikipedia which are named after the
> person except where that person used their na
names too. Check it out, if you like,
but please don't publicize a list.
FT2
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 2:28 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> Still practicing, after all these years.
>
> From the information provided to this list, it is reasonable to
> assume that other wikiped
academy I live near or worked
with in the past.)
FT2
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 1:34 PM, FT2 wrote:
> When a person says "by an arbcom" it implies by one of several arbcoms that
> exist. The word "an" (um/uma) suggests one of several/many.
>
> Perhaps more accuratel
quot;) in English implies
information provided that may or may not be useful to the reader but is
given because it is possibly helpful.
FT2
On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> Let's see if perfect practice makes perfect.
>
> The quoted tag line, &qu
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Virgilio A. P. Machado wrote:
> The only Wikipedian that has been dealt with by an arbcom by his real
> name, NOT his user name!
>
This tag line is extremely inaccurate, for what it's worth.
FT2.
__
ly you are to seem legitimate and
> “notable” -- a precondition for inclusion."
>
> legitimate and notable by facebook, twitter and blogs?
>
> przykuta
>
"legitimate" as any kind of inclusion criterion at all?
FT2
___
founda
imately the decision is because as a charitable foundation, WMF can
deliver its mission far more if it identifies providers of those skills at
commercial rates, pays them, and acquires funds by donation to do so, than
if it sought to obtain those services without pay by volunatry effort.
FT2
On Sa
I drafted this. It still seems the best approach in terms of keeping good
editing and reducing problematic editing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:FT2/Commercial_and_paid_editing
FT2
On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 12:05 AM, David Goodman wrote:
> Most current paid editing gets deleted at Spe
m as a
foundation to maximize our efforts by removing barriers that research
suggests may have wider impact or affect larger groups and sectors of the
population.
FT2
On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 6:30 AM, Keegan Peterzell wrote:
> I would not wish that world upon anyone, Fred. African Americans are
>
s the Wikimedia mission isn't just "build a website" but "make available
free knowledge". In that context people willing to care matter, as an
integral part of the mission.
FT2
On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 8:47 PM, Bod Notbod wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 3:17 PM, luk
Point her to this thread? If it isn't needed this time it may be
salient not too far in future for other things.
FT2
On 11/12/10, David Gerard wrote:
> Probably we should ask Danese first, she'd have to make sure we had
> the techs and resources on hand
quot;, would do the
job..
FT2
On 11/12/10, Hans A. Rosbach wrote:
> We have become the superpower, and that gives us a moral obligation to think
> beyond our own projects. Among the things we ought to be wary of is
> monoculture. If Wikipedia becomes the only source for encyclop
cess was followed in that
eventuality.
Those would be my questions. They may be fine, but they are the ones I would
focus on as deciders, given that bandwidth and tech support will probably
not be a huge factor (use their own server or make a spare one available?).
FT2
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 7:5
n any stage, who could so assess
it. So in principle this is always true even in specific cases it doesn't
happen.
FT2
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:44 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:28 PM, FT2 wrote:
> > Not so. The difference is we document reliable sources, we
quot;.
By contrast academics and researchers writing papers are forming their own
view. So the factors going into that are crucial to assess the quality and
basis of that view and reliance a reader may wish to personally place on it.
FT2
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:22 AM, geni wrote:
> On 7 No
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
