from_name: Ilmari Karonen

body:
Brian wrote:
>
> According to "Wegge", da.wp has run fine for 8 months with
> $wgFilterRobotsWL = true;
>
> Can someone please enable this on en.wp?

It'd be even nicer the have this toggleable with a link on the watchlist
page, like "Hide/Show own edits", but I suppose that may take a little
extra coding.

--
Ilmari Karonen


list: wikien-l

source: pipermail-mbox

from_name: Mark Wagner

subject: [WikiEN-l] [WikiEn-l] Image tagging followup

body:
On 3/10/06, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
> Mark Wagner wrote:
>
> >
> >Untagged images: 67 of 500 images had no templates whatsoever on them.  Less
> >than half that number had been tagged as "no source" or "no license".  I get
> >the feeling that the image-tagging project is falling behind here.
> >
> We're still catching up! People are crunching lists going back to
> last summer, not what was uploaded yesterday. 67 untagged per day
> is easily dealt with in an hour, if those are the only images needing
> tagging. Another proposal is to autoschedule new untagged uploads
> for deletion.

There were 1866 images uploaded on that day.  I only checked about
quarter of them, so it's actually around 250-300 untagged images.  I
could certainly modify OrphanBot to tag images with a blank image
description page as "no source", but if there's content on the image
description page (which is true for most of them), it takes a human to
tell the difference between {{no license}} and {{GFDL-presumed}}.

> >4) Tags that are not in the upload menu are almost always used correctly.
> >
> Certainly an argument for dropping the menu...

I don't know about that.  If you want to use something that's not in
the menu, it means two things: (1) you care enough to want the image
to be tagged correctly, and (2) you know enough to realize that the
tag you want isn't in the menu.  Getting rid of the menu won't make
this true for more people.

--
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]


body:
On 3/10/06, Rob <gamaliel8 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Perhaps new users could be forced to view a brief tutorial about fair use,
> et al before being allowed to upload images.

That might work for the 10% who care about copyright.  For the other
90%, it's just one more thing to click through: they don't care, they
just want their pretty pictures.

--
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]


from_name: Guettarda

body:
On 3/10/06, Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> See my point #1: the average uploader doesn't care.  A summary such as
> "If the owner of this image doesn't agree that it's fair use, I agree
> to be sued for copyright infringement" might work.  I don't think
> anything less blunt would get the message across.

I'd have rather strong reservations about anything so blunt - after all,
fair use is a copyright infringement which is permissible under US law in
certain specific cases.  The issue of the owner objecting is secondary -
there are people who would happily agree to Wikipedia using their material
but not to downstream users, but that is incompatible with the aims of the
project.  On the other hand, something might be legitimately fair use and
still draw objections from the copyright owner.

That said, I agree that stronger language might not be a problem for ALL
media uploads.

Ian


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Tim 'avatar' Bartel

subject: [Wikitech-l] Please enable bot filtering on en.wp watchlists

body:
Hi Wikipedians,

Ilmari Karonen schrieb am 10.03.2006 11:09:
> Brian wrote:
>
>>According to "Wegge", da.wp has run fine for 8 months with
>>$wgFilterRobotsWL = true;
>>
>>Can someone please enable this on en.wp?
>
> It'd be even nicer the have this toggleable with a link on the watchlist
> page, like "Hide/Show own edits", but I suppose that may take a little
> extra coding.

You can toggle it already in recent changes, so it shouldn't be too much
additional coding.

Bye, Tim.

--
'And all those exclamation marks, you notice? Five?
A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head.'
-> Terry Pratchett ("Maskerade")
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 548 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060310/24bc66cd/attachment.pgp>


body:
On 3/10/06, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
>
> Mark Wagner wrote:
>
>
> Here's a thought - "fair use" images need to go through a review process
> *before* uploading, sort of like featured articles. If the "fair use image
> candidate" gets through the process, then it can be recorded and we don't
> have to fight about it anymore.

I have reservations about this.  Fair use is a grey area legally - it's a
permissible violation of copyright.  If we had a formal review process,
might that not make the project more liable if we get it wrong?  In
addition, if we make fair use more difficult, then we are likely to get
people tagging images with free tags.  If they are tagged as fair use, a lot
of obvious violations show up.  On the other hand, if it's mis-tagged as
{{GFDL}}, we'd really have to go to the source.

I would rather make it a requirement that the uploader list a source or the
name of the copyright holder.  Lots of images don't have a source clearly
marked, and don't have information about the copyright holder.  How can we
even hope to verify licensing if we don't know who holds the copyright (or
at worst, where it came from)

Ian


from_name: Stan Shebs

body:
Mark Wagner wrote:

>On 3/10/06, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
>
>>Mark Wagner wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Untagged images: 67 of 500 images had no templates whatsoever on them.  Less
>>>than half that number had been tagged as "no source" or "no license".  I get
>>>the feeling that the image-tagging project is falling behind here.
>>>
>>>
>>We're still catching up! People are crunching lists going back to
>>last summer, not what was uploaded yesterday. 67 untagged per day
>>is easily dealt with in an hour, if those are the only images needing
>>tagging. Another proposal is to autoschedule new untagged uploads
>>for deletion.
>>
>
>There were 1866 images uploaded on that day.  I only checked about
>quarter of them, so it's actually around 250-300 untagged images.  I
>could certainly modify OrphanBot to tag images with a blank image
>description page as "no source", but if there's content on the image
>description page (which is true for most of them), it takes a human to
>tell the difference between {{no license}} and {{GFDL-presumed}}.
>
I'd think you'd want a new tag {{untagged}} (yes, lots of
self-referential hilarity potential), so that you're not expressing
an opinion on any information already on the page. And if the bot
drops a note on the talk page within a day, then many of the new but
legit uploaders can go back and do the fixup work themselves.

Stan


list: foundation-l

from_name: The Cunctator

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body: Avoid Copyright Paranoia.


list: wikimedia-l

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body: Avoid Copyright Paranoia.


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Andreas Vilén

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Request for Romany Wikipedia

body:
I remember looking for a romany wp, since it's an official minority
language in Sweden, and was surprised I didn't find any. I support
this suggestion wholeheartedly, even if I can't contribute in the
language.

/Andreas

On 3/10/06, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) <rowikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would like to request the creation of a Wikipedia in the Romany language,
> with the code "rom", the request having already been approved over at:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Requests_for_new_languages/Vlax_Romany
>
> There is a test Wikipedia at:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Test-wp/rom/
>
> This currently contains 14 articles, some written in the Latin alphabet and
> some in Devanagari. The Wikipedia will be biscriptal, with conversion being
> possible 1-on-1, but this will be implemented automatically later on.
>
> The interface file is at:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LanguageRom.php
>
> The test Wikipedia is also linked from the Wikimedia Romania portal, at:
> http://www.wikimedia.ro/
> So, it would be time to set up an actual Wikipedia in this language, which
> is spoken by Roma (Gypsy) people, and has around 250,000 speakers in Romania
> and more than 1.5 million worldwide. The Roma are the largest minority in
> Europe, and the largest language in Europe without a Wikipedia.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ronline
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
On 3/10/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning at netzero.net> wrote:
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
> >On 3/10/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Hoi,
> >>Commons does not have articles. Commons has its own functionality. Its
> >>purpose is to serve digital content to the WMF projects first and as a
> >>repository of content second.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Frankly, I wasn't aware of that.
> >
> >Maybe there's a need for an Uncommons, where WMF projects can share
> >digital content that isn't free.
> >
> >Anthony
> >
> >
> There is a bunch of content that is technically free but only available
> under a non-commercial use only license.  A repository of that sort
> would be a contrast to Wikimedia Commons, where non-commercial only
> licenses are not acceptable.  As for content that isn't free, try Corbis
> or one of the commercial stock photo libraries.  Those have been around
> for the better part of a century and have a huge image library that will
> take some time for Commons to catch up to being equal to.
>
> --
> Robert Scott Horning

I was counting in content only available under a non-commercial use
only license as non-free.  Not sure what you mean by "technically
free".

Anthony


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] What variant to use for Irish,
	Scottish and Welsh localities?

body:
I say go with the most common name. The point is that people should
find the articles, not that they are placed under the most "official"
name. In that case, for example, articles about countries should be
placed under their official names. To my knowledge, they never are.

/Andreas

On 3/10/06, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) <rowikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm impressed you know so much about Irish placenames - I don't think
> > that many people even in Ireland would know where "An Uaimh" is.
>
>
> Thanks :) I have a personal interest in "Celtic Europe" and the ongoing
> revival of Celtic languages in these areas.
>
> On the Romanian
> > Wikipedia in general, do you use local names of all places? What about
> > placenames of a country that has more than one local, or even official
> > language?
>
>
> When there is a Romanian name, we would use the Romanian name - for example,
> "London" is called "Londra" in Romanian, so we use that name. Same for
> "Moscova", "Varsovia", etc. But, on the whole, the Romanian language tends
> to not "naturalise" foreign names. My dilemma is that cities like
> Cardiff/Caerdydd, Cork/Corcaigh, and even smaller ones, have no Romanian
> equivalent. Therefore, we would use, as any Wikipedia would use, the local
> variant. When there are two official variants, we would use the most
> suitable one. For Basque placenames, for example, we would use the Basque
> variant (though in recent times, the Basque government has legislated that
> cities be named in the form SpanishName-BasqueName, so we get names like
> SanSebastian-Donostia, and Vitoria-Gasteiz).
>
> The difference with Ireland is the Irish is the first official and national
> language. To me at least, using English seems a bit inappropriate, even
> though I do realise that English is (unfortunately) the "main" language of
> Ireland. In areas like Wales, I would also be tempted to use the native name
> (i.e. Comitatul Ddinbych instead of Denbighshire, Comitatul = shire in
> Romanian), since Welsh is increasingly seen as the "national language" and
> is quite widely used, particularly in the north.
>
> The Polish Wikipedia places the article on Cork at Corcaigh:
> http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corcaigh
>
> No other Wikipedia does, they all use English names.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
On 3/10/06, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
> >On 3/10/06, Pawe? Dembowski <fallout at lexx.eu.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>It is likely that in the case of 'fair use' the content would remain
> >>>fair use for a large majority of the downstream uses for content on
> >>>Wikipedia.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Actually, most of the content is "fair use" only to United States
> >>users.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >It's worse than that, it's only "fair use" for use within the United
> >States.  Which means if an American wants to distribute a copy of
> >Wikipedia to someone in Africa, they have to break the law.
> >
> >And I'd dispute that fair use by Wikipedia means fair use by a large
> >majority of the downstream users.  Wikipedia can and will get away
> >with a lot of things that others can't and won't.
> >
> >
> This seems like a needlessly anti-fair-use position.  It may be accurate
> that *some* cases of fair use are fair use only in the United States, or
> only for Wikipedia, but that's hardly true of all of them, or even the
> majority of them.  Every time we quote an exact sentence or paragraph
> from a published work that's still in copyright, we're doing so under
> fair use (or fair dealing, or whatever the equivalent in various
> countries is), and this seems both unproblematic and something that the
> encyclopedia would be much worse off without.  Perhaps fair use of
> images is less widely respected internationally than fair use of textual
> excerpts, but being more careful with some types of fair use is
> different than abolishing fair-use content on Wikipedia entirely.
>
> -Mark

Well, I thought we were talking about images, which is what I'd
restrict my statement to.

I don't see how my statements are "anti-fair-use", though I don't even
know what that means.  I do think that anything in a Wikipedia article
should at the least be legal for me to print and sell.  If that
position is "anti-fair-use", then I guess I'm "anti-fair-use".

Anthony


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


from_name: Giuseppe DAngelo

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Wikipedia-l Digest, Vol 32, Issue 14

body:
Dag Gerard - je hebt gelijk.
  I support Mark's positive advice to the promoters of the Tetum wiki, what he said seemed straightforward enough to me.
  Once again, I repeat, we are talking about our newest independent nation, so it is only natural that they will eventually require (and most certainly get) a wiki in their official language, but they may need a bit of help and encouragement along the way.
  pippu d'a

Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:37:31 +0100
From: GerardM
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Request for Tetum language - reminder
To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
<41a006820603091537v15467cb1l1bdfbf43c6d094ab at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hoi,
For your information, formally Mark does not have authority. There are
few people who are seen to be authorortive. He is however one of the
people who knows a lot about what languages are. In this case the

=== message truncated ===

---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi, antispam, antivirus, POP3


from_name: Milos Rancic

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Mass content adding: France

body:
Chronology was: User:Tsca added French municipalities into Polish
Wikipedia -> there is one guy on Serbian Wikipedia who is half Polish
half Serbian and he said to us about that -> I started with inserting
French municipalities -> BUT, we need transcription, so it is stopped
on Serbian Wikipedia until we find a way for transcription -> BUT, we
made some infrastructure for that and it can be useful for the project
Mass content adding.

So, I am calling Wikipedians from France to help on the French
municipalities issue. Please, look at the two articles:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mass_content_adding/Geographic_data/Places_and_municipalities_in_France
on Meta and http://crash.vikimedija.org/index.php/%D0%A4%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%86%D1%83%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE_%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%BE
on Serbian testing wiki (in Serbian). And try to find a way to
participate in the project :)


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] RFC: Principles of mass content adding on small
	Wikipedias

body:
On 3/10/06, Andreas Vil?n <andreas.vilen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, but I guess the same does not apply to 20000 substubs about towns
> in Poland and France, in a Wikipedia in a language spoken by some
> thousand people in Africa...

There are 40.000 only in France ;)

I don't think that it should be the first goal on Swahili Wikipedia,
but when we add a number of more relevant articles, Congo and
Mozambique places will be enough relevant. And, after Africa, Europe
and Asia will be enough relevant, too.


from_name: Plyd

body:
yes! this would be great if it could be added for all wikis ;)
This list is really getting unreadable. (And the rc namespace filter would
be really fine too ;) )
thx!
Plyd

On 3/10/06, Tim 'avatar' Bartel <wikipedia at computerkultur.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Wikipedians,
>
> Ilmari Karonen schrieb am 10.03.2006 11:09:
> > Brian wrote:
> >
> >>According to "Wegge", da.wp has run fine for 8 months with
> >>$wgFilterRobotsWL = true;
> >>
> >>Can someone please enable this on en.wp?
> >
> > It'd be even nicer the have this toggleable with a link on the watchlist
> > page, like "Hide/Show own edits", but I suppose that may take a little
> > extra coding.
>
> You can toggle it already in recent changes, so it shouldn't be too much
> additional coding.
>
> Bye, Tim.
>
> --
> 'And all those exclamation marks, you notice? Five?
> A sure sign of someone who wears his underpants on his head.'
> -> Terry Pratchett ("Maskerade")
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
>


from_name: Kelly Martin

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Requests for Arbitration was Re: Wikipedia: Admins
	abusing their authority

body:
On 3/9/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> So if a person is blocked, can they request arbitration? Or not?

Anybody, blocked or not, may request arbitration by mailing the
request to any Arbitrator.  I would think that mailing it to a clerk
would also work, and as a former Arbitrator I would likely forward any
reasonable request for arbitration I might receive to the Committee,
either publicly or privately.

Kelly


from_name: Rob

body:
Perhaps new users could be forced to view a brief tutorial about fair use,
et al before being allowed to upload images.


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
On 3/10/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
[snip]
> I'm suggesting that this be the policy, of course.  That ND images
> only be used in situations where there is no free alternative, i.e.
> the situations where fair use is supposed to be limited to right now.

Not where their can be no free alternative but where we haven't found one yet.
Fair use isn't a license to liberally violate copyright, "We don't
have one yet" isn't a valid excuse to claim fair use. Or, more
clearly, it is necessary but not sufficient.

> I never suggested replacing free images with non-free ones.

You want to make it possible for people who think they are helping
Wikipedia to submit unfree content where free content is possible.

> > The only people I've ever encountered that had interest in by-nd were
> > photographers I found on forums and nagged to come submit works to
> > wikipedia.
>
> Count me as a first, then.

And what content do you hold the copyright to that we currently use as
fair use... You claim that you only want us to use BY-ND where we use
fair use, so show me an example.

The goal of Wikipedia is to create a free content encyclopedia. By
deciding that you will only release your content under an unfree
license you are deciding not to help Wikipedia with its goals, at
least in the area of illustrations.  That okay, you are not obligated
morally or legally to help.   But don't lobby us to change the rules
so that you can claim, dishonestly, to be helping with our project.

We've grant our contributors attribution, we allow them to use the
GFDL and enforce it (strictly enforced the GFDL is annoying enough for
many common commercial uses that it's easy to get people interested in
commercial use to agree to an outside license),  .... and now you also
want us to allow you to submit content which no one down stream can
alter and damage your precious artistic vision. Give me a break, we
can go without your onerous requirements.

If we ever swallow a stupid pill and permit you to upload ND works
simply because we haven't found a more free image yet, I promise
replace every last one with a free image, even if I have to travel the
world to do it, just to piss you off.


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


from_name: Servien Ilaino

body:
I would like to remind everyone the is awaiting creation aswell...

Serv

2006/3/10, Andreas Vil?n <andreas.vilen at gmail.com>:
> I remember looking for a romany wp, since it's an official minority
> language in Sweden, and was surprised I didn't find any. I support
> this suggestion wholeheartedly, even if I can't contribute in the
> language.
>
> /Andreas
>
> On 3/10/06, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) <rowikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to request the creation of a Wikipedia in the Romany language,
> > with the code "rom", the request having already been approved over at:
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Requests_for_new_languages/Vlax_Romany
> >
> > There is a test Wikipedia at:
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Test-wp/rom/
> >
> > This currently contains 14 articles, some written in the Latin alphabet and
> > some in Devanagari. The Wikipedia will be biscriptal, with conversion being
> > possible 1-on-1, but this will be implemented automatically later on.
> >
> > The interface file is at:
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LanguageRom.php
> >
> > The test Wikipedia is also linked from the Wikimedia Romania portal, at:
> > http://www.wikimedia.ro/
> > So, it would be time to set up an actual Wikipedia in this language, which
> > is spoken by Roma (Gypsy) people, and has around 250,000 speakers in Romania
> > and more than 1.5 million worldwide. The Roma are the largest minority in
> > Europe, and the largest language in Europe without a Wikipedia.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ronline
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


body:
*the is = the rest is

2006/3/10, Servien Ilaino <servien at gmail.com>:
> I would like to remind everyone the is awaiting creation aswell...
>
> Serv
>
>
> 2006/3/10, Andreas Vil?n <andreas.vilen at gmail.com>:
> > I remember looking for a romany wp, since it's an official minority
> > language in Sweden, and was surprised I didn't find any. I support
> > this suggestion wholeheartedly, even if I can't contribute in the
> > language.
> >
> > /Andreas
> >
> > On 3/10/06, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) <rowikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I would like to request the creation of a Wikipedia in the Romany language,
> > > with the code "rom", the request having already been approved over at:
> > >
> > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages
> > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Requests_for_new_languages/Vlax_Romany
> > >
> > > There is a test Wikipedia at:
> > >
> > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Test-wp/rom/
> > >
> > > This currently contains 14 articles, some written in the Latin alphabet and
> > > some in Devanagari. The Wikipedia will be biscriptal, with conversion being
> > > possible 1-on-1, but this will be implemented automatically later on.
> > >
> > > The interface file is at:
> > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LanguageRom.php
> > >
> > > The test Wikipedia is also linked from the Wikimedia Romania portal, at:
> > > http://www.wikimedia.ro/
> > > So, it would be time to set up an actual Wikipedia in this language, which
> > > is spoken by Roma (Gypsy) people, and has around 250,000 speakers in Romania
> > > and more than 1.5 million worldwide. The Roma are the largest minority in
> > > Europe, and the largest language in Europe without a Wikipedia.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Ronline
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikipedia-l mailing list
> > Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
> >
>


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
Anthony DiPierro wrote:
> On 3/10/06, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> It is a disservice to our users not to have logos in Commons. People
>> often know the logos of companies or products better then they do the
>> name. An article like IBM, Shell, Greenpeace should have the company
>> logo to illustrate the article.
>>
>>
> I really don't see how one necessitates the other.  Commons doesn't
> have articles, after all.  If you put logos into Commons, then you
> make it much harder for anyone who wants to legally distribute dumps
> of Commons.
>
> Of course, by that rationale, the WMF logo shouldn't be on Commons
> either.  Either that, or it should be released under a free license.
>
> Anthony
Hoi,
Commons does not have articles. Commons has its own functionality. Its
purpose is to serve digital content to the WMF projects first and as a
repository of content second. At this moment we cannot have logos
because they need protection from people making derivatives.
Organisations  cannot license us to have their logo under anything but a
ND license. It is dogma that prevents us from considering this.

Thanks,
   GerardM


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


body:
On 3/10/06, Stan Shebs <shebs at apple.com> wrote:
>
> Guettarda wrote:
>
> >
> >I would rather make it a requirement that the uploader list a source or
> the
> >name of the copyright holder.  Lots of images don't have a source clearly
> >marked, and don't have information about the copyright holder.  How can
> we
> >even hope to verify licensing if we don't know who holds the copyright
> (or
> >at worst, where it came from)
> >
> But then what's to keep someone from lying about the source any less than
> about license?
>
> Stan

Of course it won't solve all of our problems, but it might make matters
easier.  While some people don't care about copyright, in my experience a
lot of people are just clueless.  Most of the untagged (or obviously
mistagged) images I come across were uploaded by newbies - sometime all they
have done it upload a pile of images and add them to aricles (full sized,
and the top of the page...)  They generally are people who mean well - I
guess they just figure that we are the clueless ones who "don't know that
you can get images of X everywhere on the web" or don't know about Google
image search or...  These people are often apologetic when you explain the
situation to them.

The other thing I come across is people who upload images that are viable
fair use candidates, but they don't know anything about sourcing the
images.  Recently someone uploaded an image of the new head of the ruling
Jamaican political party (and next PM of Jamaica).  When asked about
licensing, he didn't know.  Since he provided the source, which was the
party website, it seemed reasonable to make a case for {{publicity}}.  If,
on the other hand, it had come from the Jamaica Gleaner, it would not be
something we can use.  Since he provided the source, it was possible to
determine copyright status.

What's more important though is when someone tags an image with a free
license.  If you force them to provide a source and they provide a false
one, it may be possible to check the website to see what it says with
regards to copyright.  Especially if it's {{GFDL}} - AFAICT, if an image is
GFDL, and you don't identify the creator, you are violating the license.
Identifying and credit image creators strikes me as important in and of
itself, let alone from the practical viewpoint of being able to verify the
accuracy of tags

Ian


from_name: Jonathan

subject: [WikiEN-l] Download history tool?

body:
It has been updated to animate and export a basic Excel xml:
http://dzonux.net/wikipedia-animate-hack.user.js

"Group edits" is not finished.

Steve Bennett wrote:

>On 3/10/06, Jonathan <dzonatas at dzonux.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I started to fix the script:
>>http://dzonux.net/wikipedia-animate-hack.user.js
>>
>>It shows the basic layout, but it stops right before it animates.
>>
>>Steve, are there are any other features you would like?
>>
>>Jonathan
>>
>>
>
>Ooh, interesting question :) I can now get that script to activate,
>but yeah, doesn't do much useful yet.
>
>Hard to ask for *more* features when I haven't seen what it does yet.
>But things that would be useful would be grouping all subsequent edits
>by a single editor (would be useful in general in Wikipedia), and,
>yeah like my original quest, somehow being able to download a list of
>all changes into Excel or something (with dates and URLs would be
>brilliant...)
>
>Steve
>_______________________________________________
>WikiEN-l mailing list
>WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
>
>
>


from_name: jkelly at fas.harvard.edu

subject: [WikiEN-l]  Orphanbot mod (was:Image tagging followup)

body:
Quoting Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com>:

> I
> could certainly modify OrphanBot to tag images with a blank image
> description page as "no source", but if there's content on the image

Even if almost all images have something on the description page, the above
still sounds like a useful thing to do for the ones that do not.

Jkelly


from_name: Ilmari Karonen

subject: [WikiEN-l] Did anyone else get something like this?

body:
Jay Converse wrote:
> On 3/9/06, Alphax (Wikipedia email) <alphasigmax at gmail.com> wrote:
>>Obviously it's not from Jimbo, but I wonder who's behind this...
>
> The mention of Landover Baptist Church makes me believe it's... from those
> guys, whoever's behind that site.

It's from some wag playing with their email-a-rebuke form, which is
linked to at the bottom of the message
(http://www.bettybowers.com/cgi-bin/ebuke.cgi).  Based on the message
tacked onto the end of the mail, it almost looks as if someone tried to
actually impersonate Jimbo but didn't realize their message would
include the standard rebuke as well.  Or maybe not.

--
Ilmari Karonen


from_name: Marc Dangers

subject: [WikiEN-l] Interlanguage Links - The Interwiki-Link-Checker

body:
Beware, shameless Propaganda is on its way. It's about the
Interwiki-Link-Checker
(http://tools.wikimedia.de/~flacus/IWLC/start.php) by de:user:Flacus, a
brilliant tool which has facilitated the generation of >100.000
Interlanguage-Links within the last six month.

There are still lots of articles in en:Wikipedia which have the same
name as articles in other Wikipedias, but are *not* linked by an
Inter-Wiki-Link (e.g. en-de: ~6300 articles, en-fr: ~6500 articles and
en-es ~3100 articles, as of the dumps from February 2006).

This articles have been listed for many language combinations by
de:user:SirJective. But not all articles with identical names are about
the same subject, so human work is needed to decide whether an
Interwiki-Link can be automatically inserted by a bot. In order to make
this decision easy and comfortable, there is a brilliant tool called
Interwiki-Link-Checker written by de:Benutzer:Flacus.

You might want to check the FAQ at
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Flacus/Wikipedia_Interwiki-Link-Checker/en
or just try it at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~flacus/IWLC/start.php
Thanks for your time and (maybe even) help, I can just invite you to try
the tool, it's fun and you're reading (and editing) quite a lot of stuff
you wouldn't stumble upon otherwise.

If you do like the tool and want to spread the word, visit
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Flacus/Wikipedia_Interwiki-Link-Checker/Propaganda,
help and new ideas are welcome.

Cheers, de:Benutzer:Mdangers


from_name: Steve Bennett

body:
Perhaps this fictitious mechanism could allow you to specify more than
one article?

Steve

On 3/10/06, John Lee <johnleemk at gawab.com> wrote:
> Steve Bennett wrote:
>
> >On 3/10/06, Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>3) People don't understand "fair use".  The vast majority of uploaders think
> >>"fair use" means "I think it's fair that this Wikipedia article should be
> >>illustrated", while those who are aware that it's part of copyright law tend
> >>to have mistaken ideas, such as "educational use" allows anything.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I agree. Is there a way to provide a very quick summary to anyone
> >using this tag?
> >
> >Also, a possible technical solution: force the uploader of a fair-use
> >image to specify which article it's to be used for, and prevent it
> >being used in other articles. Can a fair use image often be
> >legitimately used in different articles?
> >
> >Steve
> >
> >
> Occasionally, yes. It would piss me off if I had to upload several
> different copies of the same image to illustrate articles like
> [[Ketuanan Melayu]] (the headliner image is used on about half a dozen
> other articles), especially since I think I actually understand fair use. :p
>
> John
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Interlanguage Links - The Interwiki-Link-Checker

body:
It seems that a lot of people from different Wikipedias are reading this
list, and my post is about internationalisation of Wikipedia, so I decided I
will try to bring a certain tool to your attention. It’s the
Interwiki-Link-Checker
(http://tools.wikimedia.de/~flacus/IWLC/start.php) by de:user:Flacus, a
brilliant tool which has facilitated the generation of >100.000
Interlanguage-Links within the last six month.

As you might know, there are still lots of articles in one Wikipedia which
have the same name as articles in aWikipedia of another language, but are
*not* linked by an Interlanguage-Link (e.g. en-de: ~6300 articles, sv-fr:
~2300 articles and
nl-pl ~1400 articles, as of the dumps from February 2006).

This articles have been listed for a lot of language combinations by
de:user:SirJective. But not all articles with identical names are about
the same subject, so human work is needed to decide whether an
Interwiki-Link can be automatically inserted by a bot. In order to make
this decision easy and comfortable, there is a brilliant tool called
Interwiki-Link-Checker written by de:Benutzer:Flacus.

You might want to check the FAQ at

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Flacus/Wikipedia_Interwiki-Link-Checker/en

or just try it at http://tools.wikimedia.de/~flacus/IWLC/start.php
Thanks for your time and (maybe even) help, I can just invite you to try
the tool, it's fun and you're reading (and editing) quite a lot of stuff
you wouldn't stumble upon otherwise.

If you do like the tool and want to spread the word, visit

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Flacus/Wikipedia_Interwiki-Link-Checker/Propaganda,

help and new ideas are welcome.

Cheers, de:Benutzer:Mdangers

--
Echte DSL-Flatrate dauerhaft f?r 0,- Euro*!
"Feel free" mit GMX DSL! http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
On 3/10/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
[snip]
> There are many examples where it is REASONABLE and to be expected that
> no changes to material is made. Logos are a great example. You are
> talking in terms of conflict. You are not talking in terms of our aim.
> Informing people by providing content that is Free for everybody to use.
> Content that is as Free as it is possible to have it. It is unreasonable
> to expect that when laws make for content that can *only *be had in a ND
> way not to make an exception because of dogma. Mind you I am talking
> about information where the information cannot be had in any other way.
> Information like logos.

Your reasoning is not lost on others. This is, largely, why we permit
fair use on enwiki. But we don't confuse ourselves, unfree content is
unfree.  In the US we are fortunate that the courts have reconized the
harm that could be caused by giving copyright holder unlimited power
over their works. And the discussion on this ND matter has been
directly related to enwiki.

I'm still waiting for an example of a reasonable situation where we
should accept ND content that isn't covered by our inclusion of fair
use.


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


from_name: Phil Boswell

subject: [Wikitech-l] Using unicode in URLs

body:
"????????? ???????"
<alexander.sigachov at gmail.com> wrote in
message news:3ba413350603100720g5f643ea5p at mail.gmail.com...
> For non-latin languages it's problem to use URL of MediaWiki pages.

Is there any particular reason we can't use [[punycode]]?
--
Phil
[[en:User:Phil Boswell]]


from_name: admin Yellowikis

subject: [Wikitech-l] MySQL5 uprade

body:
A second MyISAM check seems to have solved the problem.

You can all stop worrying about it now ;-)

Paul

On 3/10/06, admin Yellowikis <yellowikis at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hmmm...
>
>
> Now we have crashing tables again.
>
> =====
> A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in
> the software. The last attempted database query was:
>
>     SELECT page_id, page_namespace, page_title FROM
> `yw_page`,`yw_searchindex` WHERE page_id=si_page AND MATCH(si_title)
> AGAINST('+test' IN BOOLEAN MODE) AND page_is_redirect=0 AND
> page_namespace IN (0) LIMIT 0,20
>
> from within function "". MySQL returned error "145: Table
> './payo/yw_searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be repaired
> (brane-int)".
>
> ====
>
> I'll try a re-install/upgrade - maybe that will fix it.
>
> Paul
>
> On 3/9/06, admin Yellowikis <yellowikis at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The upgraded to MySQL 5.0 has caused some problems. When we save an
> > article we get this error - though the changes do get saved:
> >
> > ===
> > A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in
> > the software. The last attempted database query was:
> >
> >     REPLACE INTO `yw_searchindex` (si_page,si_title,si_text) VALUES
> > ('5329','fish',' fish and fishing ')
> >
> > from within function "SearchMySQL4::update". MySQL returned error
> > "1062: Duplicate entry ' ' for key 3 (brane-int)".
> > ===
> >
> > Previously we had a corruped table:
> > ===
> > A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in
> > the software. The last attempted database query was:
> > (SQL query hidden)
> > from within function "SearchMySQL4::update". MySQL returned error
> > "145: Table './payo/yw_searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be
> > repaired (brane-int)".
> > ===
> > which was repaired and hasn't given any further problems.
> >
> > We've also run myisamchk against all the tables in the database.
> >
> > A couple of Wikimedias running 1.4.x are working without any problems
> > on the upgraded system.
> >
> > Any suggestions?
> >
> > Paul
> >
> >
> > On 2/27/06, admin Yellowikis <yellowikis at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > We are running:
> > >     *  MediaWiki: 1.5.5
> > >     * PHP: 4.4.2-0.dotdeb.1 (apache)
> > >     * MySQL: 4.1.11-Debian_4sarge2-log
> > >
> > > Planning to upgrade to MySQL 5.0.
> > >
> > > Any issues/problems that we should be aware of?
> > >
> > > (yes, we plan to do a full back up first)
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > > --
> > > Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica
> >
>
>
> --
> Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica
>

--
Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica


from_name: Lars Aronsson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Webcast with Tim O'Reilly about Reading 2.0

body:
There's a two-day symposium on mass digitization of literature
going on right now at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.
Publisher Tim O'Reilly is giving a keynote speech called "Reading
2.0" at this very moment.  It's a live webcast.  Two minutes into
his speech, he has already shown Wikipedia as the future of the
encyclopedia.  Adam Smith from Google will speak at 5 pm EST.

Schedule, http://lib.umich.edu/mdp/symposium/schedule.html

Webcast, http://lib.umich.edu/mdp/symposium/webcast.html

--
  Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
On 3/10/06, GerardM <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hoi,
> Forget about en.wikipedia !!!!
>
> It is not about en.wikipedia.

I suggest you look at the start of this thread. :)

Do you have a threading mail client?

> Please engage brain or read what has been said.  It is about COMMONS
> and OTHER projects. So forget about the fair use policy. It does not
> apply.

No, this is the direction you've tried to send the thread... but as
far as I can tell, no one else has followed.

> And when you persist in thinking en.wikipedia .. do not talk about US.
> There is more in this world. There are more projects in the WMF and
> this IS the foundation mailing list.

Agreed, but there are many other languages which permit something
roughly equivalent to fair use on enwiki.  It's not a US only concept,
but since I'm not very educated about the policies of other Wikis and
the laws of other countries, I'm stuck speaking in enwiki specific
terms.

Sorry.

If you're upset that other Wiki's refuse logos, then you should take
it up on those Wikis... any form of non-free content is going to too
controversial to force it on all languages by implementing a
substantial change in the character of commonswiki.


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


from_name: Александр Сигачёв

subject: [Wikitech-l] Using unicode in URLs

body:
For non-latin languages it's problem to use URL of MediaWiki pages.
For example, article with name "?????? ?????? ? ?????????? ?? ??????
?????????" (List of languages using Cyrillic alphabet) has ugly URL:

http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D1%8F%D0%B7%D1%8B%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D1%81_%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%84%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B8_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%D1%8B

Opera browser auto decodes this URL to readable link:
http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/??????_??????_?_??????????_??_??????_?????????

In Firefox it's able to use HumanURL extention, but in IE it's problem.

So can I add option "wgEncodeUrlsInUtf8" to LocalSettings.php and
check it in function wfUrlencode in GlobalFunctions.php? (to turn off
PHP urlencode function)

See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internationalized_Resource_Identifier

you can see demo of the hack at http://mediawiki.jino-net.ru/index.php/Main_page

Discussion in Russian: http://community.livejournal.com/ru_wikipedia/24808.html

--
Alexander Sigachov
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/user:ajvol


from_name: Mark Williamson

body:
For purely practical considerations, I would suggest using the English
name for a Romanian audience. Chances are, if they have happened to
hear of these places before, they would be more familiar with the
English name, and, in addition to that, English pronunciation is more
intuitive when reading Romanian than that of most Celtic languages --
imagine how horribly most Romanians would mangle Caerdydd, An Uaimh,
or Corcaigh.

Mark

On 10/03/06, Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) <rowikipedia at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm planning to work on a number of articles related to Irish, Scottish and
> Welsh localities on the Romanian Wikipedia. I am currently in a dilemma as
> to what name to use - the Celtic variant or the English variant. I have
> realised that most non-English Wikipedias use the English variant - so that
> place names such as "Cork", "Dublin", "Edinburg" and "Cardiff" are used. For
> the exception of Dublin, perhaps, many of these place names, particularly
> smaller towns, do not have native variants in languages such as Romanian,
> German, French, etc.
>
> So, why should the English name be used in this situation? Wouldn't the
> Celtic name be more appropriate? Celtic languages are co-official in
> Scotland and Wales, while in Ireland, Irish is the first official and
> national language. Due to this, I would prefer to use placenames such as
> "Corcaigh", "*An Uaimh*" (for Navan), "*Chill Dara" *(for Kildare), etc.
> However, this sounds quite odd and are not frequently used, even though they
> are the first official name. What do others think? I am inclined to use them
> so that people are actually educated that there exists an Irish language as
> the first official language of Ireland. Too often, people in Romania say
> "the Irish speak (just) English" and stop it at that. They're surprised, for
> example, when I tell them about Irish names such as "Baile Atha Cliath" for
> Dublin, etc.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ronline
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
"Take away their language, destroy their souls." -- Joseph Stalin


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
Delirium wrote:
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
>
>> On 3/10/06, Pawe? Dembowski <fallout at lexx.eu.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> It is likely that in the case of 'fair use' the content would remain
>>>> fair use for a large majority of the downstream uses for content on
>>>> Wikipedia.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Actually, most of the content is "fair use" only to United States
>>> users.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> It's worse than that, it's only "fair use" for use within the United
>> States.  Which means if an American wants to distribute a copy of
>> Wikipedia to someone in Africa, they have to break the law.
>>
>> And I'd dispute that fair use by Wikipedia means fair use by a large
>> majority of the downstream users.  Wikipedia can and will get away
>> with a lot of things that others can't and won't.
>>
>>
>>
> This seems like a needlessly anti-fair-use position.  It may be accurate
> that *some* cases of fair use are fair use only in the United States, or
> only for Wikipedia, but that's hardly true of all of them, or even the
> majority of them.  Every time we quote an exact sentence or paragraph
> from a published work that's still in copyright, we're doing so under
> fair use (or fair dealing, or whatever the equivalent in various
> countries is), and this seems both unproblematic and something that the
> encyclopedia would be much worse off without.  Perhaps fair use of
> images is less widely respected internationally than fair use of textual
> excerpts, but being more careful with some types of fair use is
> different than abolishing fair-use content on Wikipedia entirely.
>
> -Mark
Hoi,
There is no need to be anti fair use. It has no bearing on most
projects. The English language wikipedia is the only one where you could
argue that the American rules apply completely. So its application is
largely overrated. It is much more important to find a way that would
allow us to have a logo of a company in all the other projects. Forget
the English Wikipedia, it is only the biggest. The last time I heard
about it the other projects grow faster than en.wikipedia. So let us
address the issues of these other projects.

I do not want to abolish fair-use I could not care less. It just does
not apply to what I want done, on the projects where there is a need.

Thanks,
    GerardM


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


from_name: SCZenz

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by Danny
	under any circumstances

body:
May I suggest that it would be helpful if Danny started using some
kind of generic explanatory template for WP:OFFICE protections?  Every
time it's used, people are rather confused and frustrated until it's
explained.

SCZenz

On 3/10/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Else you may be blocked or temporarily desysopped. These tags are
> bloody serious, the WP:OFFICE rule is only used in case of actual
> problems, and the Foundation handles them as expeditiously as they
> possibly can. I expect everyone will piss and moan, but removing a
> WP:OFFICE tag is a really really dickish thing to do. So please don't.
>
>
> - d.
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
On 3/10/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/10/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> [snip]
> > I'm suggesting that this be the policy, of course.  That ND images
> > only be used in situations where there is no free alternative, i.e.
> > the situations where fair use is supposed to be limited to right now.
>
> Not where their can be no free alternative but where we haven't found one yet.

Well, not really.  I think fair use (and by extension, ND), should
only be used where there *isn't* a free alternative (and likely won't
ever be).

> Fair use isn't a license to liberally violate copyright, "We don't
> have one yet" isn't a valid excuse to claim fair use. Or, more
> clearly, it is necessary but not sufficient.
>
"We don't have a free alternative yet" has basically nothing to do
with whether or not the use is actually fair use.  But it should be
(and I believe it is) a necessary condition set by Wikipedia.  It's
Wikipedia policy, not law.

> > I never suggested replacing free images with non-free ones.
>
> You want to make it possible for people who think they are helping
> Wikipedia to submit unfree content where free content is possible.
>
No, I don't.  I frankly don't know where you're getting that from
because I've continually expressed exactly the opposite.

> > > The only people I've ever encountered that had interest in by-nd were
> > > photographers I found on forums and nagged to come submit works to
> > > wikipedia.
> >
> > Count me as a first, then.
>
> And what content do you hold the copyright to that we currently use as
> fair use... You claim that you only want us to use BY-ND where we use
> fair use, so show me an example.
>
I guess I misunderstood your statement.  I don't personally have any
images on the Wikipedia that I own the copyright to and haven't
released under a free license.

> The goal of Wikipedia is to create a free content encyclopedia. By
> deciding that you will only release your content under an unfree
> license you are deciding not to help Wikipedia with its goals, at
> least in the area of illustrations.  That okay, you are not obligated
> morally or legally to help.   But don't lobby us to change the rules
> so that you can claim, dishonestly, to be helping with our project.
>
If non-free images don't help Wikipedia, then why does Wikipedia allow
them at all?

> If we ever swallow a stupid pill and permit you to upload ND works
> simply because we haven't found a more free image yet, I promise
> replace every last one with a free image, even if I have to travel the
> world to do it, just to piss you off.

Well, there are some images for which getting a free alternative is impossible.

But hey, if I believed you, that alone would be a good reason to
implement the policy.  I'm not sure why you think replacing non-free
images with free ones would piss me off.

Anthony


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
On 3/10/06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen at gmail.com> wrote:
> There are many examples where it is REASONABLE and to be expected that
> no changes to material is made. Logos are a great example.

Actually, pretty much any image being used for the purposes of
commentary is a good example.  And that's the only reason I can think
of that fair use should ever be acceptable in a free encyclopedia
anyway.

Take any non-free image on Wikipedia.  Most likely it is either 1) not
acceptable on Wikipedia, or 2) would be better if it were released
under CC-BY-ND.

Anthony


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


subject: [Wikitech-l] Using unicode in URLs

body:
????????? ??????? wrote:
> For non-latin languages it's problem to use URL of MediaWiki pages.
> For example, article with name "?????? ?????? ? ?????????? ?? ??????
> ?????????" (List of languages using Cyrillic alphabet) has ugly URL:
>
> http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%BA_%D1%8F%D0%B7%D1%8B%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D1%81_%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%84%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B8_%D0%BD%D0%B0_%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B5_%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BB%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%D1%8B
>
> Opera browser auto decodes this URL to readable link:
> http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/??????_??????_?_??????????_??_??????_?????????

Ironically, in my Mozilla Thunderbird, the "ugly" URL works and even
shown the proper Cyrillic title in the status bar, whereas the
"readable" version looks like aplhabet soup and takes me to a "no such
article" page.  I can get it to work if I manually view the message with
a koi8-r encoding, but Thunderbird refuses to display it as such by
default even though I've unchecked the "always use my encoding" box.

--
Ilmari Karonen


from_name: Steve Block

body:
Mark Wagner wrote:

> Brief summary: We are in *deep* shit.

The misapprehensions regarding fair use may have been festering quite
some time.  To put the cat amongst the pigeons: [[Image:AtlasAward.jpg]].

Since fair use images are not allowable in user space, and barnstars and
awards are given to people on their user page, it's kind of interesting
to see this precedent set.  There's brief discussion on the fair use
issue at the bottom of [[User talk:Pedant/2004-11-19]].

It seems to be an old enough image and use that some discussion might be
warranted.

Steve block

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/278 - Release Date: 09/03/06


from_name: The Cunctator

body:
On 3/10/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Else you may be blocked or temporarily desysopped. These tags are
> bloody serious, the WP:OFFICE rule is only used in case of actual
> problems, and the Foundation handles them as expeditiously as they
> possibly can. I expect everyone will piss and moan, but removing a
> WP:OFFICE tag is a really really dickish thing to do. So please don't.

Is there any particular reason you're putting this on the mailing list?


subject: [Wikitech-l] MySQL5 uprade

body:
Spoke too soon - problem has returned.

Will try re-installing.

Paul

On 3/10/06, admin Yellowikis <yellowikis at gmail.com> wrote:
> A second MyISAM check seems to have solved the problem.
>
> You can all stop worrying about it now ;-)
>
> Paul
>
>
> On 3/10/06, admin Yellowikis <yellowikis at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hmmm...
> >
> >
> > Now we have crashing tables again.
> >
> > =====
> > A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in
> > the software. The last attempted database query was:
> >
> >     SELECT page_id, page_namespace, page_title FROM
> > `yw_page`,`yw_searchindex` WHERE page_id=si_page AND MATCH(si_title)
> > AGAINST('+test' IN BOOLEAN MODE) AND page_is_redirect=0 AND
> > page_namespace IN (0) LIMIT 0,20
> >
> > from within function "". MySQL returned error "145: Table
> > './payo/yw_searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be repaired
> > (brane-int)".
> >
> > ====
> >
> > I'll try a re-install/upgrade - maybe that will fix it.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > On 3/9/06, admin Yellowikis <yellowikis at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The upgraded to MySQL 5.0 has caused some problems. When we save an
> > > article we get this error - though the changes do get saved:
> > >
> > > ===
> > > A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in
> > > the software. The last attempted database query was:
> > >
> > >     REPLACE INTO `yw_searchindex` (si_page,si_title,si_text) VALUES
> > > ('5329','fish',' fish and fishing ')
> > >
> > > from within function "SearchMySQL4::update". MySQL returned error
> > > "1062: Duplicate entry ' ' for key 3 (brane-int)".
> > > ===
> > >
> > > Previously we had a corruped table:
> > > ===
> > > A database query syntax error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in
> > > the software. The last attempted database query was:
> > > (SQL query hidden)
> > > from within function "SearchMySQL4::update". MySQL returned error
> > > "145: Table './payo/yw_searchindex' is marked as crashed and should be
> > > repaired (brane-int)".
> > > ===
> > > which was repaired and hasn't given any further problems.
> > >
> > > We've also run myisamchk against all the tables in the database.
> > >
> > > A couple of Wikimedias running 1.4.x are working without any problems
> > > on the upgraded system.
> > >
> > > Any suggestions?
> > >
> > > Paul
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/27/06, admin Yellowikis <yellowikis at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > We are running:
> > > >     *  MediaWiki: 1.5.5
> > > >     * PHP: 4.4.2-0.dotdeb.1 (apache)
> > > >     * MySQL: 4.1.11-Debian_4sarge2-log
> > > >
> > > > Planning to upgrade to MySQL 5.0.
> > > >
> > > > Any issues/problems that we should be aware of?
> > > >
> > > > (yes, we plan to do a full back up first)
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica
> >
>
>
> --
> Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica
>

--
Yellowikis is to Yellow Pages, as Wikipedia is to The Encyclopedia Britannica


from_name: y control

subject: [WikiEN-l] (no subject)

body:
few days ago, i added my photoblog to the list on "photoblog" page. however,
i noticed it was removed. it's a legit photoblog, and when i re-edited it, i
didn't find any specifications to adding a website - just the fact that it
had to be a "photoblog".

my website was just opened, and there's not too many photos, but enoght to
be on the list (or so i thought). i emailed the user who edited the page,
and asked why they deleted it. i wasn't in the best of mood, so i might've
sounded harsh. he never replied, so i assumed it might've been a mistake on
his part.

today, i noticed it was removed by "Cryptic" without a notice and without a
reason. i emailed him quickly asking why the website got deleted. to which
he blocked me for the following reasons "Zero contributions; being used to
send spam via wikipedia email". i DID NOT say anything in a mean way to him,
and i didn't spam him, i simply asked a question. and of course i have 0
contribution, because i've just joined the website!

i feel the removale of my website was without reason - i couldn't find a
reason anyway. there are no ads on my website, and the main part of it are
photos. there were no specifications to add a website, so why was mine taken
off?

also, my block was unfair, since i did not email cryptic in paticular with
any sort of spam. i simply asked him why the site was blocked, so i could
fix it.

thank you for your time.

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/


body:
Stan Shebs wrote:

> I'm not sure that review changes liability, it can be pointed to as a
> good-faith effort to do things correctly. All the empirical evidence
> so far is that we're much more picky about fair use than just about
> everybody else online, after all nobody seems to be shutting down the
> giant celebrity galleries from which many of our images are copied.
> WP's angst about fair use is internally generated.

I think the angst is generated with concern to commercial reusers.  The
line that has been discussed with me, or at least my understanding of
that line, is that Wikipedia's value to commercial reusers drops if they
have to evaluate all fair use images.  What value there is to wikipedia
in having commercial reusers isn't, now I comne to think of it, fully
explained.  If we're releasing this stuff GFDL then we can't be getting
paid by commercial reusers, can we?  Or do we instead receive generous
donations from commercial reusers?

Steve block

--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 268.2.1/278 - Release Date: 09/03/06


body:
On 3/10/06, Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote:
> See my point #1: the average uploader doesn't care.  A summary such as
> "If the owner of this image doesn't agree that it's fair use, I agree
> to be sued for copyright infringement" might work.  I don't think
> anything less blunt would get the message across.

Ok, assume some *do* care, can't we come up with some summary like
"for fair use, you have to be actually talking about the image itself
- not just the subject depicted in the image" or something? IANAL. I
have to admit that fair use has always been a bit of a mystery to me
as well - particularly in a university context it often gets
interpreted as something like "don't take too much, and don't do it
too publicly, and you'll be right".

Steve


from_name: Ryan Delaney

body:
On 3/10/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Is there any particular reason you're putting this on the mailing list?

Because he wants to see if you really will oppose or challenge absolutely
anything anyone does, ever.

Experiment over.

Ryan


from_name: Wikipedia Romania (Ronline)

body:
Hi,

I'm planning to work on a number of articles related to Irish, Scottish and
Welsh localities on the Romanian Wikipedia. I am currently in a dilemma as
to what name to use - the Celtic variant or the English variant. I have
realised that most non-English Wikipedias use the English variant - so that
place names such as "Cork", "Dublin", "Edinburg" and "Cardiff" are used. For
the exception of Dublin, perhaps, many of these place names, particularly
smaller towns, do not have native variants in languages such as Romanian,
German, French, etc.

So, why should the English name be used in this situation? Wouldn't the
Celtic name be more appropriate? Celtic languages are co-official in
Scotland and Wales, while in Ireland, Irish is the first official and
national language. Due to this, I would prefer to use placenames such as
"Corcaigh", "*An Uaimh*" (for Navan), "*Chill Dara" *(for Kildare), etc.
However, this sounds quite odd and are not frequently used, even though they
are the first official name. What do others think? I am inclined to use them
so that people are actually educated that there exists an Irish language as
the first official language of Ireland. Too often, people in Romania say
"the Irish speak (just) English" and stop it at that. They're surprised, for
example, when I tell them about Irish names such as "Baile Atha Cliath" for
Dublin, etc.

Thanks,

Ronline


from_name: David Gerard

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by Danny under
	any circumstances

body:
Else you may be blocked or temporarily desysopped. These tags are
bloody serious, the WP:OFFICE rule is only used in case of actual
problems, and the Foundation handles them as expeditiously as they
possibly can. I expect everyone will piss and moan, but removing a
WP:OFFICE tag is a really really dickish thing to do. So please don't.

- d.


body:
Hi,

I would like to request the creation of a Wikipedia in the Romany language,
with the code "rom", the request having already been approved over at:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Requests_for_new_languages/Vlax_Romany

There is a test Wikipedia at:

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Test-wp/rom/

This currently contains 14 articles, some written in the Latin alphabet and
some in Devanagari. The Wikipedia will be biscriptal, with conversion being
possible 1-on-1, but this will be implemented automatically later on.

The interface file is at:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LanguageRom.php

The test Wikipedia is also linked from the Wikimedia Romania portal, at:
http://www.wikimedia.ro/
So, it would be time to set up an actual Wikipedia in this language, which
is spoken by Roma (Gypsy) people, and has around 250,000 speakers in Romania
and more than 1.5 million worldwide. The Roma are the largest minority in
Europe, and the largest language in Europe without a Wikipedia.

Thanks,

Ronline


from_name: Robert Scott Horning

subject: [Foundation-l] Seed Wiki... when?

body:
Another VfD has come up on English Wikibooks that brings to mind the
issue again of having a seed wiki somewhere, and the sense that perhaps
Wikibooks is a logical place to host new projects.  For some specific
details see:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks%3AVotes_for_deletion#Errata

I think this is an ideal candidate for inclusion with a brand-new seed
wiki, with perhaps the Wiki for Standards proposal that successfully won
a vote on Meta and is technically going "before the board" as per the
new project policy.

My question again that I'm throwing up to the community (again) is if
the seed wiki should be started as a seperate project, or should
Wikibooks serve in that role.  I have heard opinion from four board
members (Angela, Anthere, Jimbo, and Tim) that this is inappropriate for
Wikibooks and they should be developed elsewhere.  Yet both this Errata
and the Wikimania proceedings were put on Wikibooks, both with the idea
that there was no other place to put content like this and it was simply
the "best fit" even if it didn't quite fit Wikibooks policies or match
Wikibooks content as being a textbook.  This has happened within the
past year for both of these projects.  Wikierrata was even proposed as a
new project on Meta about the same time this content was put on
Wikibooks BTW.

Is the real solution Wikicities?  Should we simply tell people that are
interested in setting things like these or the dozens of other projects
that have been proposed on Meta that their only option is to go to
Wikicities or start it on their own dime on a seperate server?  With
Wikiversity taking over seven months to go from proposal to still not
being turned on, even after an overwhelming vote of support from the
user community, nor really rejected by the board either and being in
limbo.  The sheer bureaucracy in trying to get it going has frustrated
many individuals, and in the case of Wikiversity they have a "seed wiki"
that they are working on:  Wikibooks.

Other projects are told to stay away, with the hint that some sort of
seed wiki is eventually going to be started to help deal with these
kinds of projects.  Projects like Wikitree have already been developed
as independent projects after the users involved decided the whole
Wikimedia new project process was just simply too much, even though that
went through at least the initial stages of becoming a new Wikimedia
project and followed the policy mentioned on Meta before going off on
their own.

I suggest this because it seems like Wikimedia community members are
going to Wikibooks with new projects even with the official
pronouncements that it shouldn't be done, and it being formally listed
as an official policy on Wikibooks this shouldn't be happening.   At
least six different projects of this nature have occured in this past
year alone, most removed through VfD processes or some sort of community
concensus that it shouldn't be on Wikibooks, or that the content
"mutated" into a textbook after policies were explained to the
participants.  There are others that are even starting on Wikibooks this
year, and it seems "oh no, not again".  I try to nip it right as it is
being created when I can catch it, but in the case of Errata the users
who have been developing the content have about 100 pages of content and
they justifibly are upset that they are told to pack their bags now.

I guess I'm asking what is the official policy going to be on this issue
as to the place for creating new Wikimedia projects, and what would the
guidelines be for starting a new project with a seed wiki?  Since a seed
wiki doesn't exist, what is going to be required to get one started?
 Should it simply be Wikibooks or Wikicities? (Good reasons for either
or both)  Should we instead try to go through the whole process of a
formal vote and new project creation for a Wikimedia seed wiki site?
(with hopefully a much better name as SeedWiki is already used
elsewhere).  As the need is already acknowledged by board members and
has even been discussed on the agenda of several board meetings, I'm not
sure if the need is there for going through the whole new project
creation process, but it might iron out some details before such a
project is started.

--
Robert Scott Horning


subject: [Foundation-l] Seed Wiki... when?


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] Fundraising info back online

body:
Kyle had another go at resuscitating tingxi, the machine that was housing the
fundraising status information, but it remains uncooperative.

I've commandeered friedrich, another of the old Apache batch which is due to be
retired from main service due to its slower processor and low memory. It's now
online & showing the fundraising goodies.

It may take some hours for all DNS to properly clear for
fundraising.wikimedia.org; try friedrich.wikimedia.org if it isn't working for you.

I'll continue live updates of the database shortly; for now I ran a batch
update. About two days of data are missing from mid-February due to various core
machines being down, but everything since should be properly collected into the log.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20060310/a0b01142/attachment.pgp>


from_name: Daniel R. Tobias

subject: [WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by Danny

body:
On 10 Mar 2006 at 20:25, "David Gerard" <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:

> Else you may be blocked or temporarily desysopped. These tags are
> bloody serious, the WP:OFFICE rule is only used in case of actual
> problems, and the Foundation handles them as expeditiously as they
> possibly can. I expect everyone will piss and moan, but removing a
> WP:OFFICE tag is a really really dickish thing to do. So please don't.

Not that I have any intention of doing such a thing... but I still
have some concerns about the whole WP:OFFICE business. Sure, I
realize the necessity for something like that; as long as Wikipedia
and its parent foundation exist as real-world entities rather than
just disembodied Internet phenomena, there will be people in charge
who have bills to pay, legalities to comply with, servers to keep
running, and so on... and, hence, concerns for which their butts are
on the line in a manner not shared by the typical geek just editing
Wikipedia for the fun of it.  Nevertheless, in a site which prides
itself on openness and rule by community consensus, having actions
take place unilaterally and secretively goes against the grain, and
should be kept to an absolute minimum.

There's kind of a feel that, if an article happens to offend the
"wrong" people (who have some kind of political, financial, or legal
leverage to use against Wikipedia/Wikimedia?), the Wikipedia Secret
Police can just make it disappear, and community consensus (and all
the Wikipedia pillars) be damned.

We already know that the community is secondary to the goal of
producing an excellent encyclopedia.  But is that, in turn, secondary
to some secret corporate agenda held by the Foundation Office?
Blanking articles into sub-stubs and protecting them doesn't seem
conducive to producing an excellent encyclopedia, and doing this
without explanation is not conducive to the community.

--
== Dan ==
Dan's Mail Format Site: http://mailformat.dan.info/
Dan's Web Tips: http://webtips.dan.info/
Dan's Domain Site: http://domains.dan.info/


from_name: Craig Franklin

body:
Hi Ronline,

I, personally, would go with the Celtic names, especially in Ireland where
they are now mostly "official" over the English versions, and then redirect
the English version of the name in.  This is not the consensus on :en
though, I'm sad to say.

Cheers,
- Lankiveil [[:ga:?s?ideoir:Lankiveil]]

-------------------
Craig Franklin
PO Box 764
Ashgrove, Q, 4060
Australia
http://www.halo-17.net - Australia's Favourite Source of Indie Music, Art,
and Culture.

----- Original Message -----
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 20:21:48 +1100
> From: "Wikipedia Romania (Ronline)" <rowikipedia at gmail.com>
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] What variant to use for Irish, Scottish and
> Welsh localities?
> To: wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
> Message-ID:
> <648f108b0603100121k2d9e159fw19f370215b94b095 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm planning to work on a number of articles related to Irish, Scottish
and
> Welsh localities on the Romanian Wikipedia. I am currently in a dilemma as
> to what name to use - the Celtic variant or the English variant. I have
> realised that most non-English Wikipedias use the English variant - so
that
> place names such as "Cork", "Dublin", "Edinburg" and "Cardiff" are used.
For
> the exception of Dublin, perhaps, many of these place names, particularly
> smaller towns, do not have native variants in languages such as Romanian,
> German, French, etc.
>
> So, why should the English name be used in this situation? Wouldn't the
> Celtic name be more appropriate? Celtic languages are co-official in
> Scotland and Wales, while in Ireland, Irish is the first official and
> national language. Due to this, I would prefer to use placenames such as
> "Corcaigh", "*An Uaimh*" (for Navan), "*Chill Dara" *(for Kildare), etc.
> However, this sounds quite odd and are not frequently used, even though
they
> are the first official name. What do others think? I am inclined to use
them
> so that people are actually educated that there exists an Irish language
as
> the first official language of Ireland. Too often, people in Romania say
> "the Irish speak (just) English" and stop it at that. They're surprised,
for
> example, when I tell them about Irish names such as "Baile Atha Cliath"
for
> Dublin, etc.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ronline
>


from_name: John Lee

subject: [WikiEN-l] [WikiEn-l] Image tagging followup

body:
Steve Bennett wrote:

>On 3/10/06, Mark Wagner <carnildo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>3) People don't understand "fair use".  The vast majority of uploaders think
>>"fair use" means "I think it's fair that this Wikipedia article should be
>>illustrated", while those who are aware that it's part of copyright law tend
>>to have mistaken ideas, such as "educational use" allows anything.
>>
>>
>
>I agree. Is there a way to provide a very quick summary to anyone
>using this tag?
>
>Also, a possible technical solution: force the uploader of a fair-use
>image to specify which article it's to be used for, and prevent it
>being used in other articles. Can a fair use image often be
>legitimately used in different articles?
>
>Steve
>
>
Occasionally, yes. It would piss me off if I had to upload several
different copies of the same image to illustrate articles like
[[Ketuanan Melayu]] (the headliner image is used on about half a dozen
other articles), especially since I think I actually understand fair use. :p

John


body:
On 3/10/06, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 3/10/06, The Cunctator <cunctator at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Is there any particular reason you're putting this on the mailing list?
>
>
> Because he wants to see if you really will oppose or challenge absolutely
> anything anyone does, ever.
>
> Experiment over.

Huh? I really suspect David has better things to do with his time than that.


from_name: Gerard Meijssen

subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images

body:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 3/10/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal at inbox.org> wrote:
> [snip]
>
>> I'm suggesting that this be the policy, of course.  That ND images
>> only be used in situations where there is no free alternative, i.e.
>> the situations where fair use is supposed to be limited to right now.
>>
>
> Not where their can be no free alternative but where we haven't found one yet.
> Fair use isn't a license to liberally violate copyright, "We don't
> have one yet" isn't a valid excuse to claim fair use. Or, more
> clearly, it is necessary but not sufficient.
>
>
>> I never suggested replacing free images with non-free ones.
>>
>
> You want to make it possible for people who think they are helping
> Wikipedia to submit unfree content where free content is possible.
>
>
>>> The only people I've ever encountered that had interest in by-nd were
>>> photographers I found on forums and nagged to come submit works to
>>> wikipedia.
>>>
>> Count me as a first, then.
>>
>
> And what content do you hold the copyright to that we currently use as
> fair use... You claim that you only want us to use BY-ND where we use
> fair use, so show me an example.
>
> The goal of Wikipedia is to create a free content encyclopedia. By
> deciding that you will only release your content under an unfree
> license you are deciding not to help Wikipedia with its goals, at
> least in the area of illustrations.  That okay, you are not obligated
> morally or legally to help.   But don't lobby us to change the rules
> so that you can claim, dishonestly, to be helping with our project.
>
> We've grant our contributors attribution, we allow them to use the
> GFDL and enforce it (strictly enforced the GFDL is annoying enough for
> many common commercial uses that it's easy to get people interested in
> commercial use to agree to an outside license),  .... and now you also
> want us to allow you to submit content which no one down stream can
> alter and damage your precious artistic vision. Give me a break, we
> can go without your onerous requirements.
>
> If we ever swallow a stupid pill and permit you to upload ND works
> simply because we haven't found a more free image yet, I promise
> replace every last one with a free image, even if I have to travel the
> world to do it, just to piss you off.
Hoi,
This sounds very much doctrinal. It sounds like "them and us" and "they
are wrong and we will not talk because it is not negotionable". Freedom
is served by informing properly. Freedom is served by telling the whole
story. People are liberated by giving them NPOV information. When it is
not possible to have your "free" pictures or whatever EVER, stop
preaching, stop rediculing, engage brain function... We liberate by
telling it straight; the honest truth and nothing but the NPOV truth.

There are many examples where it is REASONABLE and to be expected that
no changes to material is made. Logos are a great example. You are
talking in terms of conflict. You are not talking in terms of our aim.
Informing people by providing content that is Free for everybody to use.
Content that is as Free as it is possible to have it. It is unreasonable
to expect that when laws make for content that can *only *be had in a ND
way not to make an exception because of dogma. Mind you I am talking
about information where the information cannot be had in any other way.
Information like logos.

Thanks,
    GerardM


subject: [Foundation-l] Fair use images


from_name: Neil Harris

subject: [Wikitech-l] Using unicode in URLs

body:
Phil Boswell wrote:
> "????????? ???????"
> <alexander.sigachov at gmail.com> wrote in
> message news:3ba413350603100720g5f643ea5p at mail.gmail.com...
>
>> For non-latin languages it's problem to use URL of MediaWiki pages.
>>
>
> Is there any particular reason we can't use [[punycode]]?
>

Yes. Punycode only works in domain names, not URL paths.

-- Neil


from_name: Fl Celloguy

subject: [WikiEN-l] [WikiEn-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by

body:
>May I suggest that it would be helpful if Danny started using some
>kind of generic explanatory template for WP:OFFICE protections?  Every
>time it's used, people are rather confused and frustrated until it's
>explained.
>
>SCZenz
>
>On 3/10/06, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Else you may be blocked or temporarily desysopped. These tags are
> > bloody serious, the WP:OFFICE rule is only used in case of actual
> > problems, and the Foundation handles them as expeditiously as they
> > possibly can. I expect everyone will piss and moan, but removing a
> > WP:OFFICE tag is a really really dickish thing to do. So please don't.
> >
> >
> > - d.

Done already. See [[Template:Office]]; I've already told Danny about this.
Thanks!

Flcelloguy
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee?
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963


from_name: future civilization

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Request for Tetum language - reminder/ analogy
	with deletion of Moldovan Wikipedia

body:
Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.

  His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.

  You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.

I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
discussing them.

Silas Snider <swsnider at gmail.com> wrote:
  -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Mark Williamson wrote:
>> Question:
>> What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
>> Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
>
> Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
> I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
> respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
> who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
> at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
> quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
> other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
> advisement.
>
> If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
> say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
> a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
> Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
>
>> etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
>> yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
>> various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
>
>>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
> newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
> discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
> closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
>
> I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
> posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
> look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
> interest as well.

No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).

>
>> My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
>> arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
>
> Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.

You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.

I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
discussing them.

>
> Mark
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

Sincerely,
Silas Snider
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
=K/Tl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com


from_name: Steve Summit

subject:
[WikiEN-l] Don't remove a WP:OFFICE tag put there by
	Danny	under any circumstances

body:
>>> Is there any particular reason you're putting this on the mailing list?
>>
>> Because he wants to see if you really will oppose or challenge absolutely
>> anything anyone does, ever.
>
> Huh? I really suspect David has better things to do with his time than that.

Touch?!


subject: [Wikipedia-l] deletion of Moldovan Wikipedia

body:
Several IPs coming from Phoenix, Arizona (home address of Mark W.) made several edits (and also several personal attacks) on Moldovan Wikipedia thus breaking the result of the vote to delete the Moldovan Wikipedia and decision taken to freeze/or to rapidly delete this wikipedia made here.

  A ban for Mark for about a month maybe will chill him out and stop him from doing disruptive edits any more. A respect for the result of the vote would be too much from him as he immediately lounched himself in personal attacks.

  There is no more talking about this Moldovan Wikipedia, people decided to close and delete it. Now, its your job to do it and respect the decision.

  There was a vote for a long period of time: one month. Everybody had the chance to express himself and now the result of the vote shows very clear: people want DELETION OF MOLDOVAN WIKIPEDIA. Now, put this in practice.

future civilization <future_civilization at yahoo.com> wrote:
  Yes, indeed. Mark doesn't have any authority and/or credibility, as himself admits. He is very interested in closing/opening any wikipedia but he uses a very disruptive language towards the new users. This disruptive language shows his limited comprehension on wikipedias in various languages. In this way he discourage people who are enthusiast to close/open new wikipedias. He has no power to decide for such a decision at the very least he wants to ask for attention. Maybe this is explained by his early age in life. You can't have any authority having only 16-17 years.

His style is to demolish everything and has a strongly counter-effect, a strong negative one on what happens in Wikipedia. I checked his blocking log and shows a mean, very strong negative behaviour.

You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.

I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
discussing them.

Silas Snider wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160

Mark Williamson wrote:
>> Question:
>> What authority do you, Mark, have over the creation of a new wikipedia?
>> Are you a developer? I don't seem to ever see you contributing patches,
>
> Put simply, I don't. I have no real authority. However, I do know that
> I have some sway, because different people have varying degrees of
> respect for me in the matter of languages. There are certainly those
> who don't trust me at all or who think I don't know much of anything
> at all about languages, but I think most people believe that I know
> quite a bit about languages but at the same time have problems with
> other things about me so they take most of my opinions/advice under
> advisement.
>
> If some developer wants to create a Tetum WP immediately, I have no
> say in that. However, I'm pretty sure that the Wikimedia community as
> a whole will have much more enthusiasm for the creation of a Tetum
> Wikipedia if its test-wiki is more vibrant and is in 100% Tetum.
>
>> etc. on wikitech-l. In fact, almost all the posts that I can see of
>> yours involve some kind of discussion over orthography or languages in
>> various wikipedias, especially when discussing closing one.
>
>>From what you say here, it seems to me that you're a relative
> newcomer. Before the Moldovan controversy, there was almost never any
> discussion about closing Wikis, given that the only 2 that have been
> closed so far are Toki Pona and Klingon.
>
> I'm not sure what's wrong, though, with the fact that almost all of my
> posts are about languages -- is that a bad thing? Certainly, if you
> look at other posters, many of them tend to have areas of particular
> interest as well.

No, its not a bad thing, I was just trying to establish why I thought
you were not a developer (in case it turned out that you were).

>
>> My point is: on what grounds do you consider it your job to be the
>> arbiter of when a proposal for wikipedia creation is good enough?
>
> Who said I do consider it my job? Besides you, that is.

You appear to take an extremely keen interest in the closing / opening
of wikipedias, more so than the average poster on this list. I am just
worried about newcomers who are excited about creating a wikipedia
getting discouraged because someone, without the community's backing,
acted as though he had the power to approve or deny the request. This
came out extremely strongly in your last message to Manuel.

I am not saying that you should stop being interested in the creation
and destruction of wikipedias -- I am just worried about your style of
discussing them.

>
> Mark
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

Sincerely,
Silas Snider
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEESQELeGN0GHdxM0RA1bOAJ9cv+yhyURgAsRZtglt96Iqr+4gsACfQIRl
hWdkEhAIf6yWdx9WCmbi3AU=
=K/Tl
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com