Re: [Foundation-l] Principle and pragmatism with nudity and sexual content

On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 10:18 AM, David Gerard wrote: > 2009/4/20 Birgitte SB : > >> 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 comm

Re: [Foundation-l] NPOV as common value?

On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 1:25 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: > Some of the NPOV-related problems may be solved by talking about > context. If we say that a single piece of art (or propaganda or > whatever) is not a context, then problems related to Commons are > solved. Yes. Context is relevant to any

Re: [Foundation-l] Principle and pragmatism with nudity and sexual content

On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 10:01 AM, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: > This is under understanding the whole issue is not covered by BLP policy > (I assume if a vagina is shown but the face is not this is not a BLP > issue). I would feel better if we got model rights whenever using someone's body to ill

Re: [Foundation-l] Principle and pragmatism with nudity and sexual content

Last post on this thread. On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 5:38 PM, private musings wrote: > There are many shots clearly 'posed' - which I personally feel means that > permission is clearly granted by the subject - however there are also many > which don't indicate that the subject has any idea the imag

Re: [Foundation-l] Volunteer Appreciation

Welcome, Jennifer. The current foundation-l traffic isn't quite as vibrant an intro to the community today as it was in 2005 or so. I hope you will share your thoughts, even unformed! For a historical taste, don't forget to visit the nostalgia wiki: http://nostalgia.wikipedia.org ...and even ht

Re: [Foundation-l] Volunteer Appreciation

ally refer to them that way. > > [[User:Steven:Walling]] > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: > >> Welcome, Jennifer.  The current foundation-l traffic isn't quite as >> vibrant an intro to the community today as it was in 2005 or so.  I >>

Re: [Foundation-l] More on Wikimedia strategic planning

I would love more context for this (excellent, ambitious) discussion. What timescales are to be considered? What range of scope reassessment is appropriate? A long-range planning section would be helpful, if only to provide context for more immediate targets. For comparison, here is a brief list

Re: [Foundation-l] More on Wikimedia strategic planning

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > 2009/4/30 Samuel Klein : >> I'd like to see Wikimedia as a community take some 300-year stances on >> knowledge dissemination, > > Did you mean 300 years? Yes. Considering the stakes and our capacity for

Re: [Foundation-l] More on Wikimedia strategic planning

Stu writes: > - We can't do them all at the same time -- even with all our > success we have limited money and volunteer energy. A strategic > plan can help provide focus and prioritization. > - The approach the Board and Sue have laid out -- widespread > involvement from our entire community -- i

Re: [Foundation-l] More on Wikimedia strategic planning

I could use a revision history and list of related discussions for this conversation. [perhaps a mailing list isn't the best or highest-visibility venue, considering the audience] Where else is this conversation taking place? Are past discussions of high-priority questions relevant? On Sat, May

Re: [Foundation-l] More on Wikimedia strategic planning

On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 4:19 AM, Sue Gardner wrote: > * I was speaking with Lennart face-to-face, in Berlin -- although I think he > and > I have been having a version of the quality/participation conversation for > about a > year now. This conversation about the strategy project on foundation-l

[Foundation-l] Foundation-community support and communication

In a different thread, Sue Gardner wrote: > * Thanks Milos for advocating on behalf of a permanent Research Analyst! I > want this too. An aside : many researchers in the community (of readers, if not editors) are interested in research of almost any type associated with WP/WMF data, and would l

Re: [Foundation-l] Cross-wiki articles

On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 4:16 PM, Ting Chen wrote: > Amir Elisha Aharoni wrote: >> On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 21:09, Yoni Weiden wrote: >> >>> The question is - shouldn't there be one set of standards for all >>> Wikipedias? Perhaps for issues so important that they demand standardization. We roughly

[Foundation-l] Long-term archiving of Wikimedia content

I'm splitting off a separate thread about long-term archiving. The original thread is important enough not to derail it. This is a big topic, and also one that has been addressed in many different bodies of planning and literature. The Long Now foundation has considered a 10,000-year library pro

Re: [Foundation-l] Long-term archiving of Wikimedia content

h-specific layout? SJ On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 8:12 PM, geni wrote: > 2009/5/5 Samuel Klein : >> I'm splitting off a separate thread about long-term archiving.  The >> original thread is important enough not to derail it. >> >> This is a big topic, and also one that has

Re: [Foundation-l] Long-term archiving of Wikimedia content

On Tue, May 5, 2009 at 12:02 AM, Tim Starling wrote: > > I can tell you what the Rosetta folks would say: they would say that > they paid $125k to Norsam for 5 prototype discs, and that we are free > to do the same. Norsam have developed this technology at great cost > and expect a commercial retu

Re: [Foundation-l] Long-term archiving of Wikimedia content

On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Tim Starling wrote: > > I wouldn't go quite that far. The idea of doing it (or having done it) > makes people feel good, due to the collective sci-fi-like fantasy > implicitly promulgated by the project itself -- a future world of > poverty and decay, saved by the

[Foundation-l] Quality metric : penetration and efficacy of corrections

Here's a hoax that persisted for weeks and was picked up by MSM articles. http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0506/1224245992919.html?via=mr One question is how to catch / force-verify new facts. A totally separate one is how to make corrections stick / how to improve the rate of aw

Re: [Foundation-l] Stategic planning : Sharing textbook knowledge

On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 10:21 AM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 8:13 PM, Platonides wrote: >> You have a copy of wikipedia on your hard disk. You can access it. >> But your computer lifetime is finite. And you also don't know for how >> much time you'll still have electric current.

Re: [Foundation-l] Stategic planning : Sharing textbook knowledge

with a community that speaks a different language. SJ * Of course this could be boiled down to "part of a good comprehensive article on Wikipedia" in the same way that all wikiprojects could be merged into WP if one were so inclined... On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 4:35 PM, David Gerard w

Re: [Foundation-l] Stategic planning : Sharing textbook knowledge

david gerard writes: > No, no. All wikiprojects could be merged into *Wikibooks* if one were > so inclined. The encyclopedia is clearly only one book in the library, > it's just by far the biggest one. Indeed. Or into Wiktionary, since it's all just a matter of defining in detail various keywords

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia is not censored (was Wikipedia is not the Karma Sutra, was Re: commons and freely licensed sexual imagery

Nice thread. On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Birgitte SB wrote: >> I think this email really shows a misunderstanding of "Wikipedia is not >> censored" is about; so I am starting a new thread to discuss the issue. > > Well, for my part, I

Re: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] commons and freely licensed sexual imagery

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: > El 5/14/09 3:16 PM, private musings escribió: >>     - Commons currently hosts many pictures, taken in a public place, without >>     the apparent permission of the subject... < >>     highly unlikely to me to be genuinely released under a fre

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia is not censored (was Wikipedia is not the Karma Sutra, was Re: commons and freely licensed sexual imagery

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Birgitte SB wrote: > There is certainly a way to design such a feature to address the concerns you > list.  I believe the real problem with such a feature is in content > selection. There are always the boderline cases and who puts in the work to > sort it out,

Re: [Foundation-l] Long-term archiving of Wikimedia content

A brief update: On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 5:17 AM, Samuel Klein > The current amortized cost of making 10 nickel > discs (each with 10,000 pages in a 100x100 grid) is > around $500 each.   They can also make > polymer copies for much less that are likely stable > for at least

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing resolution

Thanks to everyone for handling the process so cleanly, and with an abundance of good information. Would it be possible to change the license switch to August 1 rather than June 15? I would like to point out the next major step, for which there is no time to lose : content compatibility with othe

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing resolution

AM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> Thanks to everyone for handling the process so cleanly, and with an >> abundance of good information. >> >> Would it be possible to change the license switch to August 1 rather >> than June 15? >> >> I would like to point o

[Foundation-l] Third-party GFDL text irrevocably incompatible with Wikipedia as of August 1

Hello, The relicensing process is underway. This means we have only 2 months to help GFDL wikis that want Wikipedia compatibility to follow suit. The clause that allows GFDL wikis to be relicensed to CC-BY-SA 3 expires on August 1 of this year. I am crossposting this from the licensing thread on

Re: [Foundation-l] Third-party GFDL text irrevocably incompatible with Wikipedia as of August 1

Brad : the practical implications are that we will lose the ability to copy work from a set of familiar collaborative sites -- many of which chose their license specifically to facilitate long-term exchange with Wikipedia -- and they will slowly lose access to the latest WP updates over months or

Re: [Foundation-l] Third-party GFDL text irrevocably incompatible with Wikipedia as of August 1

On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 8:54 AM, Fred Bauder wrote: >> >> The relicensing process is underway.  This means we have only 2 months >> to help GFDL wikis that want Wikipedia compatibility to follow suit. >> The clause that allows GFDL wikis to be relicensed to CC-BY-SA 3 >> expires on August 1 of thi

Re: [Foundation-l] Third-party GFDL text irrevocably incompatible with Wikipedia as of August 1

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 1:30 AM, Ray Saintonge wrote: > Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote: >> The point I was making is that I expect people will continue importing >> and exporting as per past practice with no attention given to the >> issue and few people caring. From a legal point of view that's no

Re: [Foundation-l] Third-party GFDL text irrevocably incompatible with Wikipedia as of August 1

> As much as anything else it is the short time frame that will look > pushy.  Wikipedia went through a lot of debate *before* the switch, and The timeframe is a problem, absolutely. > the internal debates of others should not matter less.  As I understand > what is being said they will still be

Re: [Foundation-l] Third-party GFDL text irrevocably incompatible with Wikipedia as of August 1

On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 2:51 PM, David Goodman wrote: > regardless of lthe licensing zealots. Free culture arose to permit > reuse, and should continue that way. We should  simply have told the So it did. Wikipedia follows much stricter rules of reuse, which is fair, as it is expected to withsta

Re: [Foundation-l] One Wikipedia Per Person (regarding the distribution of and the ability to read Wikipedia)

This is a good thought-experiment to rerun regularly : working through what 'all human knowledge to each person in his/her own language' means (practical approximations of "all", "each", and "own", &c). I think at a minimum, without trying to directly solve high-upkeep projects such as hardware ma

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia tracks user behaviour via third party companies #2

On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Tisza Gergő wrote: > Tisza Gergő writes: >> I do argue that it is not in violation of the privacy policy (whether >> the people here find it acceptable is another question). > > Just to make it clear, I don't think accordance with the privacy policy > automatically

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia tracks user behaviour via third party companies #2

Michael Snow writes: > Maybe it's just the lawyer in me, but I read those comments primarily as > a defense against a perceived "prosecution" for allegedly violating the > privacy policy. I don't read them that way - rather as saying "This isn't clearly in violation; it has been working for a long

Re: [Foundation-l] Why don't we re-encode proprietary formats as Ogg?

We should do this (reencode all major formats to ogg). It would absolutely make more educational material available to commons. We can make the service available at a reasonable rate now without worrying about what happens when thousands of uploaders use it every day, and deal with issues as the

Re: [Foundation-l] [Commons-l] Some reflections about the governance of Commons

On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Stan Shebs wrote: > David Gerard wrote: >> 2009/6/15 Rama Neko : >> >> >>>        Furthermore, I sometimes have the feeling that contributors of >>> Wikipedia expect us to host all sorts of unacceptable media in return >>> of the service that they provide; while we

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikitech-l] flagged revisions

I agree this is important, to the projects and to the progress of flagged revs as a concept (which is still one step of a long journey). It is worth a quick thread on f-l for that reason if not for general interest. Sj samuel klein. s...@laptop.org. +1 617 529 4266 On Jun 19, 2009 6:47 PM

Re: [Foundation-l] Info/Law blog: Using Wikisource as an Alternative Open Access Repository for Legal Scholarship

There is a wealth of work done all the time by primary source researchers and publishers, which could be improved on by having wikisource entries, translations, &c. Related question : how appropriate would large numbers of public domain texts, with page scans and the best available OCR [and transl

Re: [Foundation-l] Info/Law blog: Using Wikisource as an Alternative Open Access Repository for Legal Scholarship

Yes, but my understanding is that while google provided part of the mbp data and scans, its continued updates to ocr since then are not being shared. I would be glad to learn this was not the case... samuel klein. s...@laptop.org. +1 617 529 4266 On Jun 21, 2009 3:14 AM, "Nikola Smol

Re: [Foundation-l] Issues about Copyright

What are examples of something which is fair use under chinese law but not under US law? In general you should not upload anything that violates US law. Additional standards are set by each community - in terms of free license v. fair use, whether an image is being used effectively on the projec

Re: [Foundation-l] Issues about Copyright

lict. And if so, can we use these text published in P.R. of China > in Wikipedia as if they were in PD? > > And, the image now has no problem at all, everything causes by the text. > > jimmy_xu_...@zhwiki > 06/25/2009 > > On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 12:30 PM, Samuel Klein wrote:

[Foundation-l] Using Wikisource as an Alternative Open Access Repository

OK. So let's drop the 'legal scholarship' from the original thread and get back on topic. On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:33 PM, John Vandenberg wrote: > off-topic?? ... surely you jest!! > > I think about _three_ of the 50+ emails in this thread have been on > the topic of open access journal article

Re: [Foundation-l] Why "Wikipedia" and not "the Wikipedia"?

Wikipedia does not take an article, nor does Wikimedia. When combined with an adjective modifying the project name, or a common noun modified by the name, the compound noun does take an article. "Wikimedia is a non-profit charitable corporation." is correct; so are "The English Wikipedia", "the

Re: [Foundation-l] Why "Wikipedia" and not "the Wikipedia"?

not for lack of transcendence... but it doesn't sound right to me. [On the other hand, I'm having a hard time thinking of a social or practical movement whose name doesn't have a 'the' in it.] SJ On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Delirium wrote: > Samuel Klein wrote:

Re: [Foundation-l] Meadow Mari Wikipedia

This is lovely! I know it has been under discussion for quite some time, congratulations. Will there be coverage of the cultural event on the new project? -sj On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 3:29 PM, Milos Rancic wrote: > First, I want to thank to Tim who created the project [1] today. > Tomorrow is th

Re: [Foundation-l] NIH and Wikimedia Foundation collaborate to improve online health information

Hello Frank, This sounds very cool. Which Wikipedians will be there? Is it open to anyone at the NIH? Is there a public agenda? SJ On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 6:16 PM, Frank Schulenburg wrote: > Hi all, > > Every day millions of people access health information online. We have > recently seen so

Re: [Foundation-l] new list summaries

These are fabulous - thank you! I absolutely agree that smaller (but interesting) lists would attract more people if they saw what sorts of discussions happen there.[the technical dump-processing list is one example...] Sj On Sun, Jul 19, 2009 at 4:00 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: > Dear all, >

Re: [Foundation-l] strategic planning IRC office hours

Hi Eugene, very nice, thank you (and welcome!) * Could you please help update the meta page on the process with your thoughts and ideas? [[m:Strategic planning 2009]] What's your current rough timeline for the coming 12 months? * I see you are using a non-editable Chandler calendar to track ta

Re: [Foundation-l] strategic planning IRC office hours

to segment the community in a way that discourages broad participation. Meta has been used for strategic planning since the beginning, and has attracted a pool of editors sympathetic to this sort of vision creation and consensus building. SJ On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Samuel Klein wr

Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad

On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 8:03 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote: > Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: > > it to Commons, or make it insufficiently; 2) why they do not make it ot > > the articles. I tried to make the point in the recent thread on the > > purpose of Commons, but somehow it did not draw enough atte

Re: [Foundation-l] strategic planning IRC office hours

Meta for this purpose. > > -Mike > > On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 02:19 -0400, Samuel Klein wrote: > > > A related question - I see there was a request to set up a new domain, " > > strategy.wikimedia.org" > > > > What would this new site be for?

Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 8:51 AM, Peter Gervai wrote: > And in my opinion uploading a reduced resolution image, like 1-5 > Megapixels is completely good and acceptable for our mission. These > are already quite useful resolutions, while they still aren't fit for > mainstream media. (Of course if p

Re: [Foundation-l] strategic planning IRC office hours

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Eugene Eric Kim wrote: > > > We'll start seeding Meta with what we know (and probably quite a bit > of what we don't) today, and I'll look forward to reading other > people's thoughts. > That will be great. > There's a tradeoff between starting with a blank slat

Re: [Foundation-l] strategic planning IRC office hours

On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Erik Moeller wrote: > I don't think it's comparable. The Quality Portal was an attempt to > drive attention towards some existing technologies and initiatives - > We have a simple and popular mechanism for creating portals. Why not ask the target audience how b

Re: [Foundation-l] [Slashdot] Why the Photos On Wikipedia Are So Bad

Thanks for sharing that, fred. It is interesting indeed! Are you going to be in nyc by any chance this wknd? samuel klein. s...@laptop.org. +1 617 529 4266 On Jul 23, 2009 3:06 PM, "Fred Benenson" wrote: Hi There, I"m a long time lurker on this list but work for Creative C

Re: [Foundation-l] Analysis of statistics

Lars makes excellent points here. We need to include in our community - experienced professional reference-work writers (and we should help them find ways to sustain themselves, particularly in niche markets -- one way is by distributing the underlying work needed to find and organize data). the

Re: [Foundation-l] Analysis of statistics

When I say "world of WP" I mean "world post-WP" -- the world we live in, in which certain businesses are failing now that basic reliable information and data are available freely... It would be healthy to see compatibly-licensed projects that use different sets of core principles; not just wikinfo

Re: [Foundation-l] Analysis of statistics

professional publishers and curators feel unwelcome on the projects, they won't discover the ways in which they have already-free knowledge to contribute. SJ On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 7:21 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > When I say "world of WP" I mean "world post-WP" -- the

Re: [Foundation-l] Analysis of statistics

at 7:32 PM, Pavlo Shevelo wrote: >> licenses -- data, overviews, and reference-style knowledge should all > > Would you please explain what do you mean as "reference-style knowledge"? > > > On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> When I say "

Re: [Foundation-l] How was the "only people who averaged two edits a week in the last six months can vote" rule decided?

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Philippe Beaudette wrote: > > On Jul 31, 2009, at 1:13 PM, Brian wrote: > >> There >> is further no top down effort to ask the community if they have any >> good >> ideas, and then ask the community what they think about the best of >> those >> ideas. That, in my vi

Re: [Foundation-l] How was the "only people who averaged two edits a week in the last six months can vote" rule decided?

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:45 PM, phoebe ayers wrote: > Dear everyone, > As a reminder, we also discussed suffrage requirements on this list last year: > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2008-April/042105.html > > As a response to concerns over the proposed requirement that there be

Re: [Foundation-l] How was the "only people who averaged two edits a week in the last six months can vote" rule decided?

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Erik Moeller wrote: > 2009/7/31 Samuel Klein : >> On critical complex topics, the Foundation could benefit from more >> discussion and better planning.  Why have we made it so hard to start >> new Projects? > > I would suggest that w

[Foundation-l] presentations and marketing @ events

[[Presentations]]: Are there any modern lists of speakers about the projects simiar to http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Presentations/speakers ? I bet that as a group we could get speaker or panel invitations to a number of digital library, elearning, linguistics, &c conferences for people who wer

Re: [Foundation-l] presentations and marketing @ events

. On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Austin Hair wrote: > On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 11:54 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> Do we have a modern press kit?  I was looking for one the other day... >> Elian's is still up on meta, but not updated.  That page should be >> tagged with a l

Re: [Foundation-l] presentations and marketing @ events

On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 3:06 AM, Guillaume Paumier wrote: Thanks, Guillom. >> Is there someplace other than [[Presentations]] and [[Posters]] where >> people are expected to share new media? > > No. But these pages are not publicised a lot. True. They need a set of navigation links, for one. >>

Re: [Foundation-l] UNESCO "Open Educational Resources: Conversations in Cyberspace"

( aside : we've got to convince UNESCO to follow the UNEP's lead and make their whitepapers available under a properly free license. -SJ ) On Sun, Aug 2, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Brianna Laugher wrote: > Hi, > > I just found out from the Open Source Business Report > () that UNESCO h

Re: [Foundation-l] How was the "only people who averaged two edits a week in the last six months can vote" rule decided?

#x27;s closer to only 10% that is free/libre -- the rate of publishing has been growing geometrically for a number of decades, and it's the last 85 years for some texts. --SJ On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 6:32 AM, John Vandenberg wrote: > On Sat, Aug 1, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: >>

Re: [Foundation-l] Knol, a year later

Another interesting point that knol drives home is : Google has a limited conception of what human collaboration looks like : how to identify it, how to harness it. Their efforts to support collaboration are very one-to-one, small-group or single contributor walled gardens that can be made world-r

Re: [Foundation-l] Knol, a year later

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:08 PM, David Gerard wrote: > 2009/8/10 Mike Godwin : > >> the primary problem for Knol >> was lack of compatibility with the existing dominant free licenses used by >> Wikimedia projects and others. In short, it was difficult for Knol to build >> on the work of other coll

Re: [Foundation-l] Knol, a year later

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 2:38 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 11:08 AM, David Gerard wrote: > > I can give you some models in which Knol, properly structured, could have > replaced us altogether.  In some sense that might be a victory for free > culture, but I see no particular rea

[Foundation-l] Open Library, Wikisource, and cleaning and translating OCR of Classics

on, Aug 3, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Lars Aronsson wrote: > Samuel Klein wrote (in two messages): > >> >> *A wiki for book metadata, with an entry for every published >> >> work, statistics about its use and siblings, and discussion >> >> about its usefulness

Re: [Foundation-l] Knol, a year later

On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 3:57 PM, Mike Godwin wrote: > On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> >> An interesting concept.  It's hard to replace an open collaborative >> process, but I think this is a subject worthy of a planning workshop > > This o

Re: [Foundation-l] [ol-discuss] Open Library, Wikisource, and cleaning and translating OCR of Classics

across translations LANGUAGE ANALYSIS * Word analysis: word sense discovery, morphology. * Sentence analysis: syntactic, metrical (poetry) > Greg > > John Vandenberg wrote: >> >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> >>> >>> ..

Re: [Foundation-l] [ol-discuss] [Wikisource-l] Open Library, Wikisource, and cleaning and translating OCR of Classics

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 9:16 PM, Lars Aronsson wrote: >> Let's take a practical example. A classics professor I know >> (Greg Crane, copied here) has scans of primary source materials, >> some with approximate or hand-polished OCR, waiting to be >> uploaded and converted into a useful online reso

Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: Election vote strikes

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:50 PM, Brian wrote: >> This is important:  NO ONE WAS DISENFRANCHISED BY THE ERROR. People >> were given suffrage who weren't entitled. >> >> > This comment makes my skin crawl. Everyone is entitled to have a voice and > it is only the Board's impoverished vision of the c

Re: [Foundation-l] Positive mention of Wikimedia sites in a web privacy study:

Feature Request Aside : I would appreciate having a preference to turn on aggressive use tracking for myself -- to provide me with personal statistics about my own site usage. Currently there's nothing other than a watchlist (or hand-created/edited page) and some toolserver tools that track edits

Re: [Foundation-l] Open Library, Wikisource, and cleaning and translating OCR of Classics

all number of works and authors. >> 6. It would be best not to duplicate work on several places. >> >> Personally I don't find OL very practical. May be I am too much used too >> Mediawiki. ;oD >> >> We still need to create something, attractive to contributors and &g

[Foundation-l] Fwd: Talis Incubator for Open Education funding available

This seems like an amazing chance for WikiProjects in almost any area. Describe how your work supports open education, set a project with milestones and metrics for success, and submit a grant request: http://blogs.talis.com/education/incubator/guidelines/ SJ -- Forwarded message

Re: [Foundation-l] New projects opened

On Thu, Aug 20, 2009 at 7:16 PM, Erik Zachte wrote: > Jussi-Ville Heiskanen wrote: > >> I am of course thinking about the list of 1000 articles >> each wikipedia should have. Just completing a >> significant part of that list is an accomplishment for >> a tiny pool of editors, but is within reach,

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikispecies

Andrew, This is a great response and anecdote. I have regularly run across people working on EOL, which has a broad staff one of whose tasks is to keep an eye on species-data resources around the web; and they are generally quite positive about wikispecies, and thinking about ways to better colla

[Foundation-l] Board Q&A session this afternoon, and IRC

Hello, There is a Q&A session with the whole board scheduled for this afternoon at 3:45 EST, at the end of Wikimania: http://wikimania2009.wikimedia.org/wiki/Schedule It will run for an hour. If you have questions to ask but are not physically at the event, you can post questions in #wikimani

Re: [Foundation-l] Expert board members - a suggestion

Hello Mark, On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Delirium wrote: > I'd personally place myself on the "objecting to WMF expansion" side, at > least in general sentiment. With larger organizations, you can indeed do > more, but also run more risks. In particular, organizations with large > staffs run

Re: [Foundation-l] [ol-discuss] Universal Library

Yann - A nice draft. you might want to add "collaborative, editable, versioned, multilingual, annotated" database of all published "works" (you may want more than just books). To Lars and DGG: OL is doing just fine for some definitions of the terms involved. But it needs ways for crowds to help

Re: [Foundation-l] 31 august, 20 years of our national holiday "Our romanian language" in Moldova, mo.wikipedia still in cyrillic !

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 8:36 AM, Chad wrote: > On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:07 AM, Andre Engels wrote: >> The foundation holds technical control over the wikipedia domains; >> nothing can be done but by the foundation to for example rename a >> wiki. > > A purely technical matter. As long as the communi

Re: [Foundation-l] Push translation

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Michael Galvez wrote: > On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 5:56 PM, David Gerard wrote: >> >> And the data that GTTK gathers from its use in Wikipedia translations? >> What would need to happen for that to start coming back, in a usable >> form? > > The translated segments ar

Re: [Foundation-l] A proposal of partnership between Wikimedia Foundation and Internet Archive

> Are people who clean up dead links taking the time to check Internet > Archive to se if the page in question is there? > > > Ec > > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/found

Re: [Foundation-l] A proposal of partnership between Wikimedia Foundation and Internet Archive

I've asked Gordon Mohr @ IA about how to work with archive-it. I will cc: this thread on any response. SJ On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 8:56 PM, George Herbert wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: >> Here's the Archive's on-demand service: >

Re: [Foundation-l] A proposal of partnership between Wikimedia Foundation and Internet Archive

on request, so this would not be a foolproof archive, but a 99% one. On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:13 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: > I've asked Gordon Mohr @ IA about how to work with archive-it.  I will > cc: this thread on any response. > > SJ > > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 8:56 PM, Ge

Re: [Foundation-l] WMF Board meetings, minutes and motions

soon – I also encouraged them to send periodical chapters reports of > their activities once they are settled in a bit :) > > Best regards, > Bence > _______ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.

Re: [Foundation-l] Classifying what is on Wikipedia

>> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >> > ___ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Please delete mo. wikipedia

On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 11:24 PM, M. Williamson wrote: > My proposal: Move mo.wp to mo-cyrl.wp or ro-cyrl.wp as an interim > measure. Create converter, once converter is created AND enabled, > delete mo-cyrl.wp. Thanks, Mark. Is there any opposition to naming such a temporary project ro-cyrl? In

Re: [Foundation-l] Greg Kohs and Peter Damian

ssent. Discussions or dissent about contracts, jobs and any Foundation policies are historically on-topic. SJ -- Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wi

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposal for new projects

Hello, WikiHow is a good place for how-tos, and has an amazing community. They unfortunately use a license (NC-SA) that isn't compatible with Wikimedia projects. If you want to do something like WikiHow under a CC-SA license, you might pursue a new Project for them -- while incubating the project

Re: [Foundation-l] Should we offer to host citizendium?

geni writes: > We should offer to host citizendium on our servers at no cost for a > period of 1 (one) year... After one year the citizendium community/Editorial > Council is expected to have sorted themselves out Sage writes: > I'm one ocean late to this conversation, but I'll give a big +1 offe

Re: [Foundation-l] Monthly Recurring Giving

Philippe (& team!), This is really great. I know many people who will find this easier. How long before this becomes the dominant mode of donation? The email about it was also charming. Thanks for making it happen this year. Sam. On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 11:55 AM, aude wrote: > On Tue, Dec 14

Re: [Foundation-l] Korean Wikipedians charged with "criminal defamation:" a potential threat of censorship

> > _______ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- Samuel Klein identi.ca:sj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] Big problem to solve: good WYSIWYG on WMF wikis

ate the next generation of templating Is this a problem space we could tackle in tandem with MindTouch and others who care about simple interfaces to edit and view complex information? Sam. -- Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj          +1 617 529 4266 __

Re: [Foundation-l] Big problem to solve: good WYSIWYG on WMF wikis

ween them while editing. For instance, simple small icons to indicate different types of editing could let you choose an inline-section-editor when fixing a typo, without losing the option to open a full editing screen. Useful to power-users and new users alike. -- Samuel Klein          identi

<    1   2   3   4   >