I hope this is a coincidence. I have great difficulty believing that the WMF board of trustees passed a resolution imagining that it would appear to be a good thing that the *very first* action it is used for is to justify the deletion of an artwork of one of its own members.
Whatever else is going on here, this is unfortunately timed in a way that appears excessively pointy. Fae On 11 December 2013 21:53, Tomasz W. Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote: > Lodewijk wrote: > >> thanks for sharing. To appreciate the resolution in its proper context, I >> was wondering if you could share if there was a specific trigger to this >> amendment? > > > How about > https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=111671264&oldid=102286853 (as > rumour has it)? > > Tomasz > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> -- [email protected] http://j.mp/faewm Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
