I'd recommend George Orwell's essay on "Politics and the English
Language". It's one of the most persuasive arguments to use clear
language I've read.
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm
We're a multi-lingual movement, and this makes clear English even more
important. If something i
>
> 23, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > on February 3, the Wikimedia Foundation senior staff gave a
> > presentation to the Board of Trustees as part of its Board meeting in
> > San Francisco, recapping the fiscal year so far (our year begins July
> > 1) and looking ahea
>
>
>
> > Does the author
> > (Jezhotwells) have the ability to release it under a free licence, if
> s/he
> > wishes?
>
> No but if they put it on permanent display in a public place the photo
> would probably be totally fine under UK freedom of panorama law.
I suspect a court would hold that th
On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 8:45 PM, Mike Christie wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Chris Keating >wrote:
>
> > I suspect a court would hold that the set of "cakes" is disjoint from the
> > set of "objects on permanent display", and thus that a phot
same set of questions is now on Meta, here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_and_Funds_Dissemination/Questions_for_Wikimedia_UK
Regards,
Chris Keating, Wikimedia UK Board
(User:The Land)
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.
I had a small encyclopedia at home (only one volume, but a massive volume)
and there was a copy of Britannica in the local library and, later, at
secondary school.
But I started getting frustrated with them when I was about 12 or 13,
because the shorter articles rarely answered the questions I had
> I think what you might be remembering is that they used to sell them via a
> sales force who went door to door. They announced a few years back that
> they were stopping that.
>
>
And, indeed, it was the reliance on the sales force that killed off
Britannica in the late-80s/early-90s when Encarta
> So a group of chapters, reacting against a perceived effort to centralize
> the movement, create a brand new central body with an extensive (and
> apparently, expensive) bureaucracy? Are there really a lot of people that
> think this is a good idea?
Yes, there are lots of people that think this
>
>
> This could be much more usefully addressed with a cooperative assistance
> group, rather than some sort of super-governance association. Somehow lots
> of chapters managed to form themselves without the existence of an
> international governing body. If technical assistance is what you are
>
>
>
>
> It is socially and historically interesting to compare very old edition of
> Brittanica to a newer edition. For example: an entry on battleships would
> evolve from a discussion of wooden ships powered by sail that enforced
> seapower of an empire to sidewheelers, to iron ships fired by coa
There are so many potential ways of recruiting new high-quality editors.
However, at the moment almost all of them founder (at least on the English
Wikipedia) on the likely reception of peoples' first edits.
Take, for the sake of argument, Wikimedia UK's donor list. There are 50,000
people who car
> During the Board of Trustees meeting today we passed a resolution on
> Trustee voting transparency:
>
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Board_of_Trustees_Voting_Transparency
>
> asking that in future resolutions we publish the names of trustees
> with their votes for each resolutio
On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 5:56 AM, John Vandenberg wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Thomas Dalton
> wrote:
> > On 31 March 2012 02:03, John Vandenberg wrote:
> >> I expect that the minutes will explain the varied positions of the
> >> board. If not, then the board should put in place p
> Actually, it is. I expect Wikipedia to outlast the U.S. Dollar at least in
> some form, or at least stick around as long as literature like "The Oddessy"
> and "The Epic of Gilgamesh" and be a part of human culture longer than the
> civilizations that produced that literature. Why would it be o
>
>
>
>
> http://www.businessinsider.com/chart-of-the-day-facebook-vs-the-rest-of-the-web-2011-6
>
>
So some guy has proved that Facebook is growing faster than the web - at
least, in the USA, why would anyone care about anywhere else? - so long as
you ignore the bits of the web that are growing li
> Facebook, and Twitter, big with Black folk, gives people something they
> can relate to. Wikipedia is as dry as reading, or writing, an
> encyclopedia.
>
> In a sense they ate our lunch, but millions of Facebook-like user pages
> can hardly be justified as a basis for charitable donations.
Are
Yes, by all means, let's fold some of the different wikis back into one.
Every day I seem to bump into a new wiki which someone is expecting me to
keep track of.
The proliferation of different wikis creates confusion, frustration and
generally sub-optimal user journeys.
Also, if it was possible
I was thinking the other day about the (relative) lack of open sound and
music files on Wikimedia projects
I happened to browse on to MusOpen - http://www.musopen.org/blog/
Does anyone here happen to know them or anything about them?
Thanks
Chris
___
> Someone just pointed me this link :
> http://webmasterformat.com/blog/destroy-wikipedia-serp-ranking
>
>
Fails at step 13 when the site owners with a clue about how Wikipedia works
spot a scumbag and laugh at them. ;-)
Chris
___
foundation-l mailing li
hniques.
>
> I'll post it soon.
>
> On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 11:06 AM, Rui Correia
wrote:
>
>> The responses so far are encouraging! ;-)
>>
>> 2011/8/1 Chris Keating
>>
>> > > Someone just pointed me this link :
>> > > http://webmas
th financial and non-financial terms. I get the impression
that some people think the only benefit of Chapters handling donor data is
that donors get tax receipts. That is definitely not the case and it if
that's the only thing we care about then that is a massive missed
opportunity for th
>
>
> Funding chapters by grants from WMF so that they all use the money in the
> > same WMF approved way is a systematically bad idea in the same way
> sending
> > shoes to Africa is a bad idea. Redefining the chapters who participated
> in
> > a joint fundraiser with WMF as WMF's "payment proces
Just occasionally this Python sketch feels very relevant to Wikipedia;
M: Ah. I'd like to have an argument, please.
R:Certainly sir. Have you been here before?
M: No, I haven't, this is my first time.
R: I see. Well, do you want to have just one argument, or were you
thinking of taking
> Does rebranding change anything then the "name" or "appearance"?
>
> Or better asked: Does it help to solve any of our real problems?
>
> I might compare this to throwing cat's around. A rather useless feature,
> since anyone knows how to edit and a personal message worth 100% more
> then a templ
I was reading Orwell's essay last night (in the old-fashioned paper form,
while in the bath).
I thought it was an interesting analysis which could apply to peoples'
motivations for contributing to the Wikimedia projects, from those who edit
"from the desire to see things as they are" to those who
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 9:18 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/28644
>
> FLAWLESS VICTORY! [*]
>
>
>
Well done to Nina Gerlach, Till Jaeger and the others involved n the process
for the success so far (I remember Matthias talking about the possibilitiy
of proceedin
>
>
>
> Finally, the Dead Sea Scrolls[1] have copyright[2]. Courtesy of The Israel
> Museum. Congratulations.
If the Dead Sea Scrolls were divinely inspired, like other Biblical texts,
then there is an argument that the author is still alive ;-)
(c) God, 2011
-chief-executive/
Regards,
Chris Keating
(User:The Land)
Wikimedia UK
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
> Not so easy. Yesterday an amendment has been officially proposed, not
> approved. It will be discussed into the parliament camera, then into the
> parliament senate. Only if both will accept it without modifications it'll
> be valid.
>
> Also, the government may ask for trust at the parliament
>
>
>
> On *2011-10-18* (today)*@ 20:00 - 21:30 UTC*, we are running a global
> campaign for an hour and a half to test our ability to and strategy for
> handling donations coming from *every country*!
Hello Charles,
Hopefully you are not doing this in the countries which have chapters that
are
> Sorry for the confusion. No we are not testing in*US, AU, DE, FR, CH, GB.*
>
>
Thanks for clearing that up. Good luck with the test. :-)
Chris
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailm
>
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fundraising_2011 and don't forget to check
> the discussion page for more places to discuss the fundraiser. As for a
> time-line, the fundraiser is scheduled to start within the first two weeks
> of November. I will see about adding some sort of time-line to the
> I just tried editing an article on en:wp on my shiny new BlackBerry
> 9300. (Which can browse Wikipedia just fine.) It was ridiculously
> annoying and I'm not sure I'd bother fixing typos I spotted in casual
> reading.
>
> (At least Vector worked in that version of the BlackBerry browser ...)
>
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Milos Rancic wrote:
> MZMcBride's email about emails reminded me that every automated email
> from Wikimedia servers looks like a bunch of programming code.
>
> The first idea was that it would be better to have some better formatted
> emails with some more infor
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Dan Collins wrote:
> On Apr 19, 2011 8:20 AM, "Tim Starling" wrote:
> >
> > On 19/04/11 19:38, Milos Rancic wrote:
> > > MZMcBride's email about emails reminded me that every automated email
> > > from Wikimedia servers looks like a bunch of programming code.
> >
>
> > A footballer protected by one of the British "superinjunctions" is
> > suing Twitter and persons unknown after he was alleged on Twitter to
> > have had an affair. Something that could have repercussions for
> > Wikipedia.
> >
> >
> >
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/may/20/twitter-sued
Well, the CTB Superinjunction is now broken in a number of places on
en.wikipedia.
So there we go.
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Also rather interestingly, it appears that a Scottish newspaper has revealed
the identity of the footballer in question, on the grounds that English
superinjunctions don't apply in Scotland.
Perhaps the WMF should open an office in Edinburgh, if London is too risky
;-)
Chris
_
Regarding the original point about superinjunctions, an MP has named Ryan
Giggs in the House of Commons and this is being widely reported in the
British media.
The superinjunction will be gone by the end of the afternoon.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Video-MP-Names-Footballer-At-Centr
On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 6:39 AM, Mono mium wrote:
> Really? That's never happened for me.
I can also report no problems editing while using Chrome. Though I don't
tend to use the built-in browser tools.
Chris
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l
40 matches
Mail list logo
