Re: [Foundation-l] getting Wikipedia to the 5.2 billion people who can't access it

2009/5/31 Gerard Meijssen : > Hoi, > Wave in its reference implementation relies on HTML 5. This means that it > requires a modern browser. With a browser it is possible to access data that > is on a LAN or on the local computer. This would allow us to have > "Wikipedia" type content stored locally

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

2009/5/31 Anthony : >> By "broadcast medium" I mean a one-way transmission of information. > > > I don't know about yours, but my TV uses two-way transmission.  So a > statement that "TV is a broadcast medium" is just not correct.  True, it's > probably correct in the vast majority of situations, b

Re: [Foundation-l] getting Wikipedia to the 5.2 billion people who can't access it

2009/5/31 Gerard Meijssen : > Hoi, > Much of the Wave  functionality demonstrated is superior to what is > available in MediaWiki. Consider a LAN with OPLC systems, consider a Wave > server on the school server.. It would be pretty damn good to be able to > have all kinds of activities that makes u

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

2009/5/31 Anthony : > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Thomas Dalton > wrote: > >> Who has cable TV that can't get internet access? > > > I didn't say *cable* TV. What kind of TV do you have that can go two ways, then? The only types I know are cable, satellite

Re: [Foundation-l] getting Wikipedia to the 5.2 billion people who can't access it

2009/5/31 Anthony : > If you watched the Wave presentation you'll see that there is quite a bit of > edit conflict handling already built in (they showed three people editing > the same page simultaneously). I did watch it. That was live, they could see each other editing and avoid each other. The

Re: [Foundation-l] getting Wikipedia to the 5.2 billion people who can't access it

2009/5/31 Anthony : > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 12:37 PM, Thomas Dalton > wrote: > >> 2009/5/31 Anthony : >> > If you watched the Wave presentation you'll see that there is quite a bit >> of >> > edit conflict handling already built in (they sh

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

2009/5/31 Anthony : > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Thomas Dalton > wrote: > >> There is no such thing as "one-way internet access". The internet is >> always 2-way. > > > Perhaps so (depends on your definitions), but then, Wave probably isn't >

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

2009/5/31 Anthony : > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Thomas Dalton > wrote: > >> 2009/5/31 Anthony : >> > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 11:05 AM, Thomas Dalton > >wrote: >> > >> >> Who has cable TV that can't get internet access? >> >

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

2009/5/31 Anthony : > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > >> 2009/5/31 Anthony : >> > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Thomas Dalton > >wrote: >> > >> >> There is no such thing as "one-way internet access". The internet

Re: [Foundation-l] getting Wikipedia to the 5.2 billion people who can't access it

2009/5/31 Anthony : > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > >> Edit conflicts with live editing aren't an issue, manual resolution is >> trivial. Edit conflicts with significant delays are a much bigger >> problem and require automated merging, which

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

2009/5/31 Ray Saintonge : > Assuming that I were somewhere in rural Africa, and perfectly > functioning hardware with Wikipedia software loaded in dropped in front > of me from the sky like a magic Coke bottle from the Gods, how much > would I then be able to use that gift to get a better yield fro

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

2009/5/31 Anthony : > I just found another statistic.  Mobile networks cover roughly 80-90% of the > worlds population. > > For them, using that mobile network is probably the most cost effective > solution.  For the rest, giving them enough of an education to have the > means to come live with the

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

2009/6/1 Anthony : > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > >> 2009/5/31 Anthony : >> > I just found another statistic.  Mobile networks cover roughly 80-90% of >> the >> > worlds population. >> > >> > For them, using t

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

2009/6/1 Anthony : > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > >> I guess I'm so used to broadband I forgot about the >> existence of dial up for a second! You would need to hand out phones, >> laptops, and network subscriptions, though - that's g

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

2009/6/1 mike.wikipe...@gmail.com : > You also found any statistics on what prices for internet access through > mobile networks are? What proportion of the world's people can afford a > internet connection in the first place, and how many can afford a > connection which is useful to browse wikiped

Re: [Foundation-l] Google Wave and Wikimedia projects

2009/6/1 Lars Aronsson : > Thomas Dalton wrote: > >> 2009/5/31 Lars Aronsson : >> > The idea of showing diffs since the user last viewed the same >> > wave, is very similar to Flagged revisions. >> >> How is it in any way like Flagged revisions? > >

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

2009/6/1 Brian : > While I'm thinking about it: > > I would like to see the WMF solicit feedback on these kinds of issues - how > it might further its goals (distribution for example) - from the wider > readership. The small, well informed and focused group on foundation-l can > do a lot, but what

Re: [Foundation-l] Lowering the idea contribution barrier (and regarding strategic planning)

2009/6/1 Brian : > Idea: You perform a Google search for some topic and end up at Wikipedia. > You find your information and are now looking for your next distraction when > you see a prominent site notice that says, "How can we make Wikipedia > better?" or somesuch. You click it and end up at a fu

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

2009/6/1 Yann Forget : > Last I asked, broadband Internet access in India was about INR 1500 (32 > US$), which is at least a week day salary for an Indian worker. > True, in theory, there are Internet cafes, but last I tried (in 2007) > they can be really used for looking at Wikipedia (too slow).

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

2009/6/2 Yann Forget : > Thomas Dalton wrote: >> 2009/6/1 Yann Forget : >>> Last I asked, broadband Internet access in India was about INR 1500 (32 >>> US$), which is at least a week day salary for an Indian worker. >>> True, in theory, there are Internet cafes,

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

2009/6/4 Jon : > Has apache/proxy level filtering been considered? Filtering for what? Javascript is executed client-side, ie. after the page has gone through the apache servers/proxies. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Uns

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

2009/6/5 Neil Harris : > Thomas Dalton wrote: >> 2009/6/4 Jon : >> >>> Has apache/proxy level filtering been considered? >>> >> >> Filtering for what? Javascript is executed client-side, ie. after the >> page has gone through the apache servers/p

Re: [Foundation-l] UN announces free (cheap) online university

2009/6/8 Moushira Elamrawy : > University website: http://www.uopeople.org > > Currently providing two academic programs; computer science track and > business admin. Enrollment deadline for fall semester hasn't yet > passed!! "[T]he University of the People does not presently confer degrees." [1]

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

2009/6/8 Brian : > I presume the WMF has a large amount of free disk space. How much? Hard drives are cheap, the WMF can just buy more if that is all that is needed. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lis

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing update: Final steps

2009/6/11 geni : > The current English wikipedia copyright terms are "You irrevocably > agree to release your contributions under the GFDL" which clocks in at > ten words. There are another 13 words of editing guidance. > > Your version clocks in at 112 words or a 380% increase. When dealing > with

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing update roll-out

2009/6/18 Erik Moeller : > 2009/6/18 Walter Vermeir : >> When I look at the updated en.wikipedia.org and [[meta:Licensing >> update/Implementation]] page I see that site footer only states that the >> text is licensed under the "Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike >> License". >> >> No mention

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing update roll-out

2009/6/18 Erik Moeller : > 2009/6/18 Thomas Dalton : >> That seems reasonable to me, but I would say "alternative terms" >> rather than "additional terms". Additional terms suggests you have to >> follow them in addition to the CC ones, which isn't

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing update roll-out

2009/6/18 Stephen Bain : > On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Erik Moeller wrote: >> >> Because the GFDL is only of interest to a minority of >> re-users, > ... > > If this is the Foundation's view, why did it opt to push for (hobbled) > dual-licencing going forward, instead of transitioning complete

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing update roll-out

2009/6/18 Brian : > It's more than a concession isn't it? The GFDL has the "or any later > version" clause. The CC-BY-SA is not a later version of the GFDL. I think we > have to keep it forever and ever. Existing content will always be available under the GFDL regardless of what the WMF does, the

Re: [Foundation-l] Licensing update roll-out

2009/6/18 Brian : > What do you consider to be "new content" ? Newly started articles, or new > edits? Either. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] GFDL-only + OTRS

2009/6/24 Michael Snow : > Pedro Sanchez wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Pharos wrote: >> >>> Of course, there are and always have been a wide range of free content >>> licenses used for images on Commons, not just GFDL and CC. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Pharos >>> >>  OTRS doesn't handle only

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

2009/6/27 Michael Snow : > Ziko van Dijk wrote: >> Hello, >> Could someone explain to me why "Wikipedia" is without definite >> article? In English you say "the Britannica", so why not "the >> Wikipedia"? I am wondering that also in German Wikipedians and >> non-Wikipedians tend to drop the article

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

2009/6/27 Anthony : > On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 11:29 AM, Andrew Gray > wrote: > >> (Perhaps Britannica gets it because "Encyclopedia" is a common word - >> we'd feel silly with the sentence "I looked it up in Encyclopedia >> Britannica", because "I looked it up in encyclopedia" would itself be >> w

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

2009/6/27 Unionhawk : > "Wikipedia" and "the Foundation" sounds right to me. When in doubt, if it > sounds right, it probably is. German grammar, I can't help you... Dieser > Benutzer *hat keine > Deutschkenntnisse > *. "The Foundation" is an interest

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

2009/6/28 Samuel Klein : > Wikipedia does not take an article, nor does Wikimedia. As far as I'm concerned "Wikimedia" doesn't exist as a proper noun. It's just an adjective: "the Wikimedia Foundation", "the Wikimedia movement", "the Wikimedia projects", "the Wikimedia community" etc. ___

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikipedia article traffic statistics - copyright?

2009/6/30 Aude : > Henrik's Wikipedia article traffic statistics tool does not indicate > copyright or license status, so it's not clear if I can include a chart on a > Wikipedia page.  Does anyone know the license status for the charts? > > http://stats.grok.se/ Facts aren't usually copyrightable

Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikitech-l] On templates and programming languages

2009/7/1 Brian : > Editors clearly need a better system for declaring facts about > articles and then using them in advanced template programming. One can > imagine an alternate system where his birthday is only declared once, > like so, in the article text: born on [[birthday::July 6, 1946]]. And

Re: [Foundation-l] $300K grant for Wikimedia Commons

2009/7/2 Erik Moeller : > All, > > I'm very happy to announce that the Ford Foundation has awarded a > $300,000 grant to the Wikimedia Foundation to improve our interfaces > and workflows for multimedia uploading. Press release here: This looks very good - congratulations! It sounds like we'll get

Re: [Foundation-l] Fwd: How do you fully consult the community consensus?

2009/7/2 Brian : > As the projects have grown and as they have become more centrally managed in > a top down fashion it has become increasingly difficult for ideas to > percolate from the bottom up. In my experience, the opposite has happened. As the projects have grown the community has taken a l

Re: [Foundation-l] No default codec for and in HTML5

2009/7/3 Brian : > H264 already plays in, IIRC, 98% of browsers through flash. Flash isn't generally available out of the box, though, is it? ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman

Re: [Foundation-l] Three new chapters

2009/7/6 Michael Snow : > I just want to quickly catch everyone up on some of the board's work in > June. In addition to the 2009-10 Annual Plan, which we approved after an > IRC meeting with Sue and Veronique, the board passed resolutions > recognizing three new local Wikimedia chapters. Our newes

Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question

I agree that this is a discussion worth having. Chapters fulfil one very specific purpose (furthering the goals of the movement within a certain geographical area), there are all kinds of other useful things to do which need appropriate tools. Several people have talked about informal groups signi

Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question

2009/7/8 Thomas de Souza Buckup : > Ilario, > > you said: > >> without an organization it's impossible to found >> a point of contact (for example there is no legal representatives). > > > I understand your concern, but in reality, there are many ways to determine > a point of contact "without an o

Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question

2009/7/8 Delphine Ménard : > I have researched a bit, while looking at the "catalan case" and my > conclusion is that such interest groups might be able to fundraise > where national chapters and the Foundation can't. It is impossible > (and in any case not desirable) for Wikimedia France or Wikime

Re: [Foundation-l] Proposal for Wikimedia Weather

2009/7/8 Tris Thomas : > Dear All, > I don't know whether this has been discussed before, apologies if it has. > > I'm interested in people's thoughts on a new Wikimedia project-maybe > WikiWeather, which basically would do what it says on the tin.  Along > with importing national weather from othe

Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question

2009/7/8 Delphine Ménard : > Exactly. One (the Welsh) is integrated into the geographic region of > one chapter, the other (the Catalan) spreads across geographic regions > taken care of by several chapters. > > > On the case of the Welsh, I see no problem of having a "Wikimedia > Wales" as a "sect

Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question

2009/7/9 Delphine Ménard : > The issue here is that, in the Catalan case for example, the effort is > already beyond just a "working group". You have a group of people who > are more than mature to have their own organisation and make it > succesful. What they lack is "legitimity" under the Wikimed

Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question

2009/7/9 Delphine Ménard : >> I think a formal "Association of Catalan Wikimedians", recognised by >> the WMF as an "affiliated organisation" and with something quite >> similar to the chapters agreement would work well. Calling it a >> chapter will cause problems, since it overlaps with other chap

Re: [Foundation-l] A chapters-related question

2009/7/9 Delphine Ménard : > It could be assimilated to the way organisations partner up to answer > EU grants for example. Each keeps their autonomy, but they all work > together towards a common goal. Call it "support" or "partnership", > not "recognition", that probably makes more sense. Yes, "

Re: [Foundation-l] The problem with native languages vs. the lingua franca

2009/7/10 stevertigo : > On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 5:02 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: >> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 1:53 PM, David Gerard wrote: > >>> I remember reading in Isaac Asimov's autobiography how, as a chemist >>> in the 1940s, he had to learn French and German well enough to read >>> papers in thos

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 David Gerard : > ... the National Portrait Gallery appear to be sending legal threats > to individual uploaders, after the Foundation ignored their claims as > utterly, utterly specious. > > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Dcoetzee/NPG_legal_threat > > The editor in question is US-

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 George Herbert : > Technically, the user could just ignore this - a lawsuit in a UK court > without relevant jurisdiction, under US law as applies, can be > ignored.  A default judgement against him might be entered, however, > and that might make future travel to Europe difficult. Would

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

The UK Intellectual Property Office (http://www.ipo.gov.uk) says: "A work can only be original if it is the result of independent creative effort. It will not be original if it has been copied from something that already exists. If it is similar to something that already exists but there has been

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Andrew Lih : > Yes, and the letter from NPG seems to assert that: > > "...we can confirm that every one of the images that you have copied > is the product of a painstaking exercise on the part of the > photographer that created the image in which significant time, skill, > effort and art

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Gregory Maxwell : >>> This is where in the US, Bridgeman v Corel established that a >>> "slavish" reproduction of a PD work does not constitute a new work >>> that can be  protected by copyright. >> >> We know that isn't the case under UK law, the question is whether the >> photographs in

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 John at Darkstar : > I sent out a press release earlier today to newspapers in Norway. It was > sent to around 200 recipients. Perhaps others could do the same thing. Please, nobody else take unilateral action. You're not the one being sued, it isn't your call. _

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the NationalPortrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Sue Gardner : > Point of clarification -- the Wikimedia Foundation sends out press releases > to international media, not just US media.  We have no plans to send out a > press release on this issue. Of course, what I meant was that only the WMF sends press releases to US media, not th

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Geoffrey Plourde : > Lets finish up the press releases and drop this thread. NPG can read it too. > Has a US press release been sent out? I doubt it. The WMF handles US press releases and they aren't stupid enough to talk to the press until they know what they're talking about. ___

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the NationalPortrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 John at Darkstar : > Local chapters can say something about whats going on, they can't make > claims on behalf of others, but they can interpret written statements > like any other blogger or news outlet. Just remember that wmf sends > press releases on behalf of wmf, nobody else do that.

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 John at Darkstar : > This is public and has been so since the first posting. The press > release was just a reference of whats going on at Wikimedia Commons, the > specific user page describing the case and this mailing list. It is sent > out through the mailing list for Wikimedia Norway

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 geni : > 2009/7/11 Thomas Dalton : >> 2009/7/11 John at Darkstar : >>> I sent out a press release earlier today to newspapers in Norway. It was >>> sent to around 200 recipients. Perhaps others could do the same thing. >> >> Please, nobody else tak

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 geni : > The case is under English and welsh law. For solid legal reasons the > NPG will be willing to make a reasonable settlement. > > Since we know that the NPG are not completely stupid and English law > in any case lacks statutory damages it would seem to be somewhat > improbable tha

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Ray Saintonge : > Geoffrey Plourde wrote: >> Lets finish up the press releases and drop this thread. NPG can read it too. >> Has a US press release been sent out? >> >> >> > There's no problem with keeping this thread going, as long as we don't > pretend that there is anything official a

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Ray Saintonge : > Thomas Dalton wrote: >> 2009/7/11 geni : >> >>> The case is under English and welsh law. For solid legal reasons the >>> NPG will be willing to make a reasonable settlement. >>> >>> Since we know that the NPG are no

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Ray Saintonge : > If he didn't want public comments he would not have made the letter > public; he might have chosen more private WMF channels. Do you know that he sought legal advice before publishing the letter? If he didn't, then is may not have been an informed choice. If he's made a

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 geni : > 2009/7/11 Thomas Dalton : >> You can't know that and it's not your place to guess. Just stay out of >> it unless Derrick asks for your help. > > I think we can safely assume that the NPG it is not going to follow a > legal strategy that gives

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Ray Saintonge : > ROTFL. He published it; that's a fact.  It would be very rare indeed for > anyone to have sought legal advice before making online comments.  The > NPG site, like many others, has a link to its terms of service.  How > often does *anyone* who uses such sites ever get leg

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 Ray Saintonge : > I've restored the comments that I was replying to since you deleted them > to wilfully mischaracterize my "ROTFL" as applying to the general issue > rather than your silly comments. > > I've yet to see any evidence that you know what you are talking about. > Your opposit

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 David Gerard : > 2009/7/11 Thomas Dalton : > >> Would I be right in assuming that you are American? You certainly have > > > Oh, and Ray is Canadian ;-p He should know better, then. ___ foundation-l mail

Re: [Foundation-l] About that "sue and be damned" to the National Portrait Gallery ...

2009/7/11 David Gerard : > 2009/7/11 Thomas Dalton : > >> Would I be right in assuming that you are American? You certainly have >> that religious view of free speech that is typical of Americans... >> This has nothing to do with suppression of free speech, it has to do &

Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery

2009/7/17 geni : > 2009/7/17 David Gerard : >> So: what would everyone here like to see in a compromise, that >> addresses the concerns of all sides? What makes the NPG happier and >> more secure, and will fly with WMF and with the Wikimedia community? > > Nothing. Wikimedia are not the only group

Re: [Foundation-l] Britain or Ukraine? What UK stands for in Wikimedia jargon

2009/7/22 Marco Chiesa : > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Teofilo wrote: >> Hello everybody; >> >> This is to say that I have written a piece on this topic at : >> >> http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page#uk.wikimedia.org_is_Wikimedia_Ukraine,_isn't_it_? >> > > I've noticed that http://www

Re: [Foundation-l] Britain or Ukraine? What UK stands for in Wikimedia jargon

2009/7/22 Pavlo Shevelo : >> ... At some point we will probably want to set >> up our own server(s) and then the confusion will be eliminated. > > I don't get it why elimination depends on hosting. I'm not sure how the WMF servers are set up, it might be possible to direct our domain directly at t

Re: [Foundation-l] Britain or Ukraine? What UK stands for in Wikimedia jargon

2009/7/22 Pavlo Shevelo : > There should not be any real problem to link wikimedia.org.uk directly > to Wikimedia UK chapter wiki (wherever it's hosted). It depends on how the WMF has everything set up. They have a complicated setup for hosting multiple wikis, it may well be hard-coded that they a

Re: [Foundation-l] Dispute resolution mailing list

2009/7/23 stevertigo : > I started a thread on Wikien-l last month suggesting we start a > dispute resolution mailing list: > http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2009-June/101428.html > > Responses were largely positive, and what little criticism the idea > got (much

Re: [Foundation-l] Dispute resolution mailing list

2009/7/23 stevertigo : > That actually wasn't my proposal to "resolve" disputes there. On the > other hand, if a report to ANI or RFC receives attention that solves > certain problems, then does that mean you would object to the usage of > ANI or RFC to "resolve disputes?" ANI and RFC *are* part o

Re: [Foundation-l] CC attribution with cut'n'pasted text - Tynt's Tracer Tool

2009/7/24 David Gerard : > http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/16060 > > Basically, if you cut'n'paste text, it appends a CC credit line to the > pasted text. Obviously the paster can remove it, but it does remind > them this is licensed, not PD. > > Worth using for our stuff? A bit obnoxious?

Re: [Foundation-l] CC attribution with cut'n'pasted text - Tynt's Tracer Tool

2009/7/24 Brian : > In that case they can highlight the attribution and press backspace! Sure, but we shouldn't make it unnecessarily difficult for people to reuse our content and tidying up after our crude attempt to force attribution would qualify as unnecessarily difficult. ___

Re: [Foundation-l] CC attribution with cut'n'pasted text - Tynt's Tracer Tool

2009/7/24 Brian : > I believe the alternate usability interpretation is more persuasive. That by > law they are required to provide attribution and yet many users are totally > unaware a) that they are required to provide attribution b) that a "free" > encyclopedia cares about attribution in the fi

Re: [Foundation-l] CC attribution with cut'n'pasted text - Tynt's Tracer Tool

2009/7/24 Gregory Maxwell : > Eh, backspace isn't much of a difficulty.   It could probably also be > made to only trigger for text over some particular size. You're not > likely to have a legal obligation for a couple of words, but if you > copy several paragraphs you'll have both a legal and an e

Re: [Foundation-l] Ombudsman commission

2009/7/28 Casey Brown : > On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Al Tally wrote: >> I notice, for example, that the enwiki >> based ombudsman, Sam Korn, has made just one edit this month. I think for a >> role like this, it is necessary to be more active than that. >> > > I wouldn't necessarily define "a

[Foundation-l] British Association of Picture Libraries and Agencies sides with NPG

http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=866109 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

Re: [Foundation-l] British Association of Picture Libraries and Agencies sides with NPG

2009/7/28 Mathias Schindler : > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: >> http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=866109 >> > > I am getting timeouts on this server. Does any have copy of their > statement for me? Works for me. That link isn&#

Re: [Foundation-l] British Association of Picture Libraries and Agencies sides with NPG

2009/7/28 Brian : > On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Mathias Schindler < > mathias.schind...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 5:46 PM, Thomas Dalton >> wrote: >> > http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=866109 >> > >>

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

2009/7/31 Steven Walling : > For me, the analogy is simple: just because you get a driver's license once > doesn't entitle you to drive for the rest of your life. Unless you actively do something wrong and get disqualified, yes it does. The analogy works for not letting banned editors vote, it doe

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

I think this is a fantastic idea. I think the biggest problem the tech side of the WMF has had over the last year or two has been prioritisation and splitting the job like this should help that no end. I'm curious - would the Senior Software Architect report to the CTO? If so, that means Brion has

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

2009/8/7 Michael Snow : > So you're suggesting we should join in the rampant title inflation of > corporate America, where everyone is a Sr. Executive Vice-President of > something? Anyway, your assessment of Brion's ongoing significance to > our operations is perceptive, and I hope everyone else m

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

2009/8/7 David Gerard : > 2009/8/7 Gregory Maxwell : > >> It's not bad to have an internal pattern, but I think it's more >> important to match the practices in industry. >> By containing the magic words "senior" and "architect" the proposed >> "Senior Software Architect" is, in my experience, not

Re: [Foundation-l] Upcoming tech hiring: CTO position split

2009/8/7 Aryeh Gregor : > Well, we can still informally call him the lead developer. We can informally call him "Brion". It's worked up until now! ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/ma

Re: [Foundation-l] Block update

Perhaps we do need a dispute resolution mailing list for resolving disputes that involve the mailing lists. It would be better than having the lists themselves filled with complaints. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubsc

Re: [Foundation-l] Block update

2009/8/8 Stevertjgo : > On Fri, Aug 7, 2009, Thomas Dalton said: > >> Perhaps we do need a dispute resolution mailing list for resolving >> disputes that involve the mailing lists. It would be better than >> having the lists themselves filled with complaints. > >

[Foundation-l] Board election spamming

I have just received an email telling me I am eligible to vote in the board elections when I have already voted. Please don't send untargetted mass emails - they are spam. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https:

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

2009/8/8 Casey Brown : > On Sat, Aug 8, 2009 at 12:40 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: >> I have just received an email telling me I am eligible to vote in the >> board elections when I have already voted. Please don't send >> untargetted mass emails - they are spam. > >

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

2009/8/8 Geoffrey Plourde : > Although I had already voted, I was not bothered by one tiny email reminding > me that I was eligible to vote. Thanks guys, hopefully this will get people > to the polls. If it was difficult to avoid emailing people that have already voted, I wouldn't mind, but I do

Re: [Foundation-l] Board election spamming

2009/8/9 Ray Saintonge : > Geoffrey Plourde wrote: >> Although I had already voted, I was not bothered by one tiny email reminding >> me that I was eligible to vote. Thanks guys, hopefully this will get people >> to the polls. >> >> >> >> > It didn't bother me either even though it came after I v

Re: [Foundation-l] Block update

2009/8/10 stevertigo : >> 2009/8/8 Stevertjgo : > >> I think those high level discussion can take place either on-wiki or >> on existing mailing lists without a problem. > > I generally agree. But "existing mailing lists" generally means wikien-l - > once highly purposed toward resolving on-wiki di

Re: [Foundation-l] Report to the Board April 2009

2009/8/11 Sue Gardner : > FUNDRAISING, GRANTS, & PARTNERSHIPS > > During April, the Wikimedia Foundation received 922 donations, with a > combined total value of USD 78,453.   Year-to-date, the Wikimedia > Foundation has raised USD 5,491415 in donations from individuals, 37% > above the full-year t

Re: [Foundation-l] Report to the Board April 2009

2009/8/12 Veronique Kessler : > Your comment is very timely.  We are, and have been, thinking about the > best solution regarding extra money.  First, we want to consider an > appropriate "reserve" amount, i.e. this can range from 3 months of > expenses for some organizations to 2 years for others.

Re: [Foundation-l] Report to the Board April 2009

2009/8/12 Benjamin Lees : > On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 6:46 PM, Sue Gardner wrote: > >> Report to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees >> >> Covering:               April 2009 >> Prepared by:            Sue Gardner, Executive Director, Wikimedia >> Foundation >> Prepared for:   Wikimedia Founda

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

2009/8/12 Gregory Maxwell : > It is my understanding that the parties incorrectly stricken > previously were not contacted. I believe that an attempt should be > made to contact stricken parties, even if it means delaying the > results. Really? That amazes me. Surely everyone that has their vote s

<    3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   >