>>> I second this. Does anyone really believe it is even possible to set
>>> one standard of what it means to be 'collegial' and 'collaborative' for
>>> all cultures? These things are not absolute values and each community
>>> needs to work out what standards are most pragmatic for it's members.
>
Yaroslav M. Blanter hett schreven:
> May be I misunderstand smth but as far as nudity is concerned (to return
> to the original topic), obviously standards are very much different in
> Denmark and Iran. Does it make sense to make a global standard and impose
> it on Danish and Farsi wikipedias at t
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Marcus Buck wrote:
> In my opinion the best system would be like this:
> We create a software measure to apply tags to specific content. ...
While creating software would be needed for a good solution, I think
we can create a simple solution by renaming all image
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:18 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> While creating software would be needed for a good solution, I think
> we can create a simple solution by renaming all images with nudity so
> that they begin with NSFW (not safe for work), as I mentioned here:
>
>
> http://en.wikipedia.o
Hoi,
We create nothing because other people will have to write it.
When you look at many crucifixes, you will see human suffering in a really
stark way. This is deeply troubling to some people and others will say that
it depicts the suffering of Jezus on our behalf. Both have a conflicting
point o
> Someone I know did not recognise a venereal disease and as a consequence
> she
> became barren. It is because of this that I asked a Dutch organisation for
> illustrations of how venereal diseases visually manifest themselves. The
> images I got show sexual organs, show ulcers and other things th
Hoi,
When you make illustration not visible you effectively remove them. It is a
cop out to continue and say that it is *others *that can decide that they do
not want to be informed, that they are willing that other people are at risk
because essential images are not readily available. It is a cop
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> Hoi,
> When you make illustration not visible you effectively remove them. It is a
> cop out to continue and say that it is *others *that can decide that they
> do
> not want to be informed, that they are willing that other people are at
Hoi,
The argument is about "not safe for work", it is about not showing these
pictures because you tag them as such. Consequently medical conditions,
particularly those that have a sexual dimension will be affected.
Explain to me why my point of view is not valid AND explain why these images
are n
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 12:27 AM, Nathan wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Gerard Meijssen > wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>> When you make illustration not visible you effectively remove them. It is a
>> cop out to continue and say that it is *others *that can decide that they
>> do
>> not want to be
--- On Mon, 4/20/09, Samuel Klein wrote:
> From: Samuel Klein
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Principle and pragmatism with nudity and sexual
> content
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> Date: Monday, April 20, 2009, 6:26 PM
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:18 AM,
> David Gerard
> wrote:
The issue of "safe for work" browsing is a distraction, not a core problem.
I don't think we often figure explicit images prominently on mainspace
articles with unrelated or tenuously connected subjects.
More importantly, no one has argued that [[Herpes]] should be text-only.
It's tangents like th
> Hoi,
> When you make illustration not visible you effectively remove them.
I can not agree with this. Many templates are hidden because they are too
bulky to be shown in the body of the atricle, so what? Everyone who wants
to get to the template can click on "show" link. Same with the pictures:
2009/4/21 :
> PM's mail included a bit on an attempt at an appeal to authority by way of
> Jimbo.
Indeed - precisely because this has been turned down (including being
voted down by a huge margin a few years ago) repeatedly on en:wp. It's
a perennial proposal.
- d.
_
2009/4/21 Yaroslav M. Blanter :
> I can not agree with this. Many templates are hidden because they are too
> bulky to be shown in the body of the atricle, so what? Everyone who wants
> to get to the template can click on "show" link. Same with the pictures:
> as one solution, one hides the pictur
On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Brianna Laugher
wrote:
> Could we please have both at once
We now have a combined notice running. Hopefully, this is a better
way of doing it (even though it's not as pretty).
--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023
---
Note: This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.
According to http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:ContributionStatistics,
the WMF has received 4 donations, one for nearly $250k, in a currency
that doesn't seem to exist ("STO"). Does anyone know what that is
supposed to mean?
___
foundation-l ma
Thomas Dalton wrote:
> According to
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:ContributionStatistics,
> the WMF has received 4 donations, one for nearly $250k, in a currency
> that doesn't seem to exist ("STO"). Does anyone know what that is
> supposed to mean?
>
STO as in "stocks"?
--Mich
Unless my memory makes things up (which it occasionally does), those are
donations in stocks (as in stock exchange).
2009/4/21 Thomas Dalton
> According to
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:ContributionStatistics,
> the WMF has received 4 donations, one for nearly $250k, in a currenc
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Michael Snow wrote:
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> According to
>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:ContributionStatistics,
>> the WMF has received 4 donations, one for nearly $250k, in a currency
>> that doesn't seem to exist ("STO"). Does anyone know what
2009/4/21 Michael Snow :
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> According to
>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:ContributionStatistics,
>> the WMF has received 4 donations, one for nearly $250k, in a currency
>> that doesn't seem to exist ("STO"). Does anyone know what that is
>> supposed to mean?
it seems that not totally for all sub groups called anarchists
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho_capitalism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agorism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autarchism
C.m.l.
From: Milos Rancic
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Sent
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 13:30, Casey Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Brianna Laugher
> wrote:
>> Could we please have both at once
>
> We now have a combined notice running. Hopefully, this is a better
> way of doing it (even though it's not as pretty).
I just hope you guys set
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Mark Wagner wrote:
> I just hope you guys settle down on something soon. I'm tired of
> playing whack-a-mole with the sitenotices.
>
Hmm? This is the only time we changed it. :-) The cookies expire
after a week, if you're referring to the notices re-appearing.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Casey Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Brianna Laugher
> wrote:
>> Could we please have both at once
>
> We now have a combined notice running. Hopefully, this is a better
> way of doing it (even though it's not as pretty).
>
> --
> Casey Brown
>
2009/4/22 Casey Brown :
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Brianna Laugher
> wrote:
>> Could we please have both at once
>
> We now have a combined notice running. Hopefully, this is a better
> way of doing it (even though it's not as pretty).
Thanks Casey and whoever else helped resolve this!
Hi,
I think the Board's statement is quite commendable if unremarkable
(which is I guess part of the reason for the silence - nothing new,
which is as it should be!). Only one comment actually surprised me.
2009/4/21 Michael Snow :
> The Wikimedia Foundation takes this opportunity to reiterate so
Brianna Laugher wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the Board's statement is quite commendable if unremarkable
> (which is I guess part of the reason for the silence - nothing new,
> which is as it should be!). Only one comment actually surprised me.
>
> 2009/4/21 Michael Snow :
>
>> The Wikimedia Foundati
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 6:52 AM, Michael Snow wrote:
> Brianna Laugher wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think the Board's statement is quite commendable if unremarkable
>> (which is I guess part of the reason for the silence - nothing new,
>> which is as it should be!). Only one comment actually surprised me
> 2009/4/21 Yaroslav M. Blanter :
>
>> I can not agree with this. Many templates are hidden because they are
>> too
>> bulky to be shown in the body of the atricle, so what? Everyone who
>> wants
>> to get to the template can click on "show" link. Same with the pictures:
>> as one solution, one hid
Milos Rancic wrote:
> In relation to your Wikiquote example, I think that you were talking
> there about notability, not about NPOV.
>
To the extent that notability has any value for us at all as a concept,
it is only because it draws on the principle of a neutral point of view.
Applying quota
This is the statement on trademarks mentioned earlier. It both states
the approach we want the Wikimedia Foundation to take and directs the
staff to carry it out. It basically sums up what our understanding has
been for a long time, but hadn't really been formally stated anywhere.
The board als
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 8:06 AM, Michael Snow wrote:
> Scientific? Is there something scientific about neutral point of view as
> a framework for Wikipedia, even? It has some similarities to the
> scientific method, I suppose, but I'm not sure that's what we imagine
> ourselves to be doing. Scienc
33 matches
Mail list logo
