from_name: Yann Forget

subject: [Foundation-l] Copyright claims...

body:
Hi Jimbo,

Le Saturday 4 June 2005 18:54, Jimmy Wales a ?crit :
> Soufron wrote:
> >> Don't you folks feel like we're getting more and more stuff like this
> >> these days ?
>
> Yes, I think we are.
>
> The kind of case that I personally find most annoying are claims from
> museums where the art underlying the photo has clearly been in the
> public domain for a very long time.  If I get one more like that, I'm
> going to go on a rampage and make a lot of noise about it.
>
> --Jimbo

Then you will have matters to complain with French administrations. ;o)

Did you heard about the French Academy claiming that their dictionaries are
all still copyrighted from the 1st edition published in the 17th century
because the people writing the dictionary are "immortels" ?

Then there is the French National Library (yes, the one complaining about
Google taking over the world) which claims copyright on their digital content
because there are, they claim, photographed, and not simply scanned, which is
IMHO quite spurious as the process for digitalization is automated. Also are
the archives of the French National Museums.

And I just learnt that according to Indian copyright law [1] all pictures are
in the public domain 60 years after the date of _publication_. Needless to
say that all Indian picture databases claim copyright of pictures up to the
19th century. See [2][3] as an example where the photographer claims
copyright for pictures he would have taken before his birth.

Yann

[1] http://www.naukri.com/lls/copyright/section5.htm#25
[2]
http://www.gandhiserve.org/cgi-bin/if/imageFolio.cgi?action=view&link=Photographs/Personalities/Kasturba_Gandhi&image=PEKG1902505001.jpg&img=&tt=
[3]
http://www.gandhiserve.org/information/our_photographers/vithalbhai_jhaveri.html

--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux


list: wikimedia-l

source: pipermail-mbox

subject: [Foundation-l] Copyright claims...


list: wikipedia-l

from_name: Sj

subject: [Wikipedia-l] An idea

body:
> > focusing on credentials might well reduce contribution; even in its
> > absence, the most common reason my brilliant iconoclastic US friends
> > give me for not writing about <whatever they're reading / studying> in
> > Wikipedia is that they are "no expert" on the subject.
> >
> > --SJ

That is, my *two* brilliant iconoclastic US friends.  People I would
have thought would glom onto the notion of adding to Wikipedia as a
natural one... but only two; your mileage may vary.

> In a world that is moving to greater transparency, wikipedia is, in
> fact, a model. Consider being able to earn one's degree by writing on
> wikipedia. Edit articles, have a thesis advisor review contributions,
> and score credit appropriately. Adding bibliography, annotation and
> other activities which "polish" wikipedia would be part of assignments.

Indeed.  and encouraging people to write more about their interests,
background, and references/sources is a very good thing in terms of
transparency.  But explicitly making it easy for others to judge you
based on that, is a bit like making "edit count" a metric of community
activity.  It encourages fraud and inflation, and discourages more
accurate and subtle metrics.


list: wikien-l

from_name: Tony Sidaway

subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration Commitee Seeking Comment

body:
sannse said:
>
> That's what we do at the moment, look at the conduct and leave the
> content to work itself out.  The question is whether we are missing the
>  underlying problem by doing this.  Are we missing the frustrations
> that  /lead/ to good people loosing their temper and acting badly?  And
> would  it be better for there to be some other means, outside of the
> AC,  to  solve these content disputes before that happens?

There are ample means for this.  We have talk pages and email addresses.
There is the RFC process.  If content disputes get out of hand it's
because "good" people cannot bring themselves to act like good people.


from_name: Sean Barrett

body:
steven l. rubenstein stated for the record:

> What we need first is a ruling by or concerning the ArbCom that it will
> consider and pass judgements on content-based disputes, or it will not.
> We just need to make this clear, one way or the other.

The ArbComm[0] will neither consider nor pass judgement on content-based
disputes.  Is that clear enough for you?

[0] For values of "ArbComm" that include [[User:the Epopt]].

--
  Sean Barrett     | Aw, Mom, you act like I'm not even
  sean at epoptic.com | wearing a bungee cord! --Calvin


list: wikitech-l

from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] user_name unique index

body:
The user_name field in the user table didn't have a unique index and
wasn't properly locked for creations, so under some circumstances (eg
heavy load and clicking 'submit' a lot exacerbating race conditions)
duplicate user accounts were getting created.

In CVS HEAD I've added an updater and a manual script (userDupes.*) for
cleaning up duplicate accounts so the unique index can be applied; the
script can also be copied in and run on 1.4 and I've gone ahead and done
this on the Wiki*edia wikis.

-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050605/3fe50d40/attachment.pgp>


from_name: David Gerard

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Switch on wikien-l moderation again instead of
	rejection?

body:
?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason (avarab at gmail.com) [050605 06:57]:

> How about configuring it to reject all mail from persons not
> subscribed to the list and send a message somewhat like "sorry, you're
> not subscribed to this list, please do so at *yadayadayada*...",
> that's what I did for wikiis-l after the spam got too much for my
> taste.

I went looking for that message (what gets sent to unsubscribed posters) in
the Mailman interface and couldn't find it. That would also be suitable as
a solution. Where's the message?

- d.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Copyright violations at download.wikimedia.org

body:
Jimmy Wales (jwales at wikia.com) [050605 06:44]:
> Roger Luethi wrote:

> > I find plenty of copyvios that are several days old, and I've had to
> > undo the work of weeks or months because some people just copy and
> > paste stuff from other web sites (no, not WP mirrors) without being
> > caught. That is a very unpleasant experience for everyone involved,
> > especially if other editors kept working on the text in good faith.

> I wonder what we can do to improve the situation.

Making it easier to selectively delete old versions from the history would
help a lot in making sure the stuff is not easily accessible. (I expect
that's a "Great! Write it.")

- d.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: sco/fiu-vro in danger..

body:
Jimmy Wales (jwales at wikia.com) [050605 07:15]:

> It is my estimate based on attending technology conventions and
> Wikimedia meetups that Wikipedia is less male dominated than free
> software and tech generally, but still male dominated to an unfortunate
> extent.

As far as we can tell discussing the topic on #wikipedia, Wikipedia is run
by a homosexual conspiracy. And the ones that aren't are transgender. IT'S
THE WIKIPEDIANS! THEY'RE IN IT WITH THE MARTIANS!

- d.


body:
Mark Pellegrini (mapellegrini at comcast.net) [050605 05:23]:

> The Arbitration Committee is seeking public commentary and suggestions
> pertaining to an ongoing problem:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/RFC

Everyone should read and consider this. We've had *lengthy* discussions on
this matter on wikien-l.

Basically: most of the really poisonous arseholes have in fact been kicked
off en: Wikipedia, and when new ones show up they are ejected in reasonable
order. (In a lot of cases, it's not even reaching the AC as they're dealt
with as obvious vandals and trolls by WP:AN/I.) So now the AC is getting a
lot of grey-area cases that are really a proxy for a content dispute. What
to do about this?

- d.


body:
David 'DJ' Hedley (spyders at btinternet.com) [050605 07:25]:
>David Gerard wrote:
> > Jimmy Wales (jwales at wikia.com) [050605 07:15]:

> > > It is my estimate based on attending technology conventions and
> > > Wikimedia meetups that Wikipedia is less male dominated than free
> > > software and tech generally, but still male dominated to an unfortunate
> > > extent.

> > As far as we can tell discussing the topic on #wikipedia, Wikipedia is run
> > by a homosexual conspiracy. And the ones that aren't are transgender.

(and, of course, many of the ones that are.)

> >  IT'S
> > THE WIKIPEDIANS! THEY'RE IN IT WITH THE MARTIANS!

> Indeed, the amount of openly LGBT Wikipedians is interestingly high. I don't
> know why Wikipedia is so appealing to homosexual contributors, but it
> appears to be that it is.

It's because Wikipedia is, like, so gay. (Friends of Wikipedians should not
write articles?)

- d.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: URGENT: blocking open proxies

body:
Gregory Maxwell (gmaxwell at gmail.com) [050605 07:37]:

> I think we must ultimately accept that blocking can not exclude
> someone from our community, and that is it not desirable to use it as
> a punitive measure, and only somewhat effective as a technical
> measure. Jumping through huge hoops to close every loophole will,
> ultimately, be as futile as a vandal trying to keep his bad edits
> in... and likely to cause lots of harm to others.

Yeah. We can ban people for ten lifetimes of the Universe, but, basically,
it's just not technically possible to keep someone from editing Wikipedia
if they *really want to*. All we can do is keep them from wreaking damage
until they get bored.

- d.


list: foundation-l

from_name: Fred Bauder

subject: [Foundation-l] [Ticket#: 126217-FW] Emily Dickinson poems

body:
The law is not unclear, nor is the fact that it is considered ethical
to seek to intimidate by adopting a posture which although it has
little, or even no support in law, may yet succeed in influencing
other's behavior.

Fred

On Jun 4, 2005, at 11:41 PM, Sj wrote:

> At the second "Signal or Noise" conference, a museum curator stated
> explicitly that many museums consider their images of their artwork to
> be copyrightable and copyrighted; they sell postcards, posters, etc of
> those images. They spend money curating the works of art, and
> commissioning the photos, and want to be able to recoup that.  (I am
> more or less repeating verbatim arguments I heard).
>
> So I do not think these are random museums breaking from tradition, or
> overeager law departments stretching to expand their control beyond
> current limits; perhaps the precedent here is unclear, or unclear to a
> significant subset of museums and their lawyers.
>
> SJ
>
> On 6/4/05, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
>> Soufron wrote:
>>
>>>> Don't you folks feel like we're getting more and more stuff like
>>>> this
>>>> these days ?
>>>>
>>
>> Yes, I think we are.
>>
>> The kind of case that I personally find most annoying are claims from
>> museums where the art underlying the photo has clearly been in the
>> public domain for a very long time.  If I get one more like that, I'm
>> going to go on a rampage and make a lot of noise about it.
>>
>> --Jimbo
>>
>
> --
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>


body:
I agree with this. Successful mediation is a lot more than saying
"Let's all get along." There are techniques which professional
mediators are trained in and experience helps. It is very much an art
which requires talent. It can work, but it will require patient
recruiting of trained skilled people as well as development of skills
within those presently involved. I think it can work out well for
those involved as skills developed here can be transfered to real
life employment opportunities.

Fred

On Jun 5, 2005, at 4:35 AM, Rebecca wrote:

> On 6/5/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> That's why I want to breath new life into the Mediation Committee. I
>> think Mediation shouldn't be another step towards banning either
>> party
>> but a genuine effort at resolving the problem.
>>
>> --Mgm
>>
>
> The point is that it didn't work before, and there's been no idea of
> how to fix the issue that ruined things before - that none of us are
> trained mediators, and most of us simply did not have the skills to
> bring antagonistic, warring parties together. We'd all like a
> mediation committee that worked, but wishing doesn't necessarily make
> it so.
>
> -- ambi
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
My suggestion is to accept content issues, but appoint committees to
research questions which are beyond ordinary competence. If someone
is "on the level" they can cite book and page in established
references in the field. Inability to do so generally means they are
an original researcher or out of touch with the literature. There are
some grey areas, for example, most references are in an unusual
language, Armenian, for example, but almost all legitimate references
can be accessed though an ordinary library with Inter Library Loan,
or at a good college library. But you see, by looking at it this way
it comes back to a behavior problem, not citing sources or improperly
removing information that has been sourced because they don't like
the point of view.

Fred

On Jun 5, 2005, at 6:56 AM, David Gerard wrote:

> steven l. rubenstein (rubenste at ohiou.edu) [050605 22:48]:
>
>
>> What we need first is a ruling by or concerning the ArbCom that it
>> will
>> consider and pass judgements on content-based disputes, or it will
>> not.  We
>> just need to make this clear, one way or the other.
>>
>
>
> I can tell you now we have no intention of taking on this one as
> well! Not
> just the amount of work, but simply that that's not what the AC was
> put
> into place for.
>
>
>
>> And if ArbCom will not or cannot handle content-based disputes, we
>> need to
>> develop another committee or mechanism.
>>
>
>
> Well, yeah.
>
> There are all sorts of possible problems. Specialist Point Of View
> is not
> necessarily Neutral Point Of View. That sort of thing.
>
>
>
>> I am repeating something I have said several times in the past.
>> This issue
>> is not new.
>>
>
>
> That's why it's being discussed here as well :-)
>
>
> - d.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


body:
Yes, we all understand, but the question is how to solve the problem
or to live with the consequences of not solving it. It is by no means
determined that the Arbitration Committee is not part of the solution.

Fred

On Jun 5, 2005, at 7:40 AM, Sean Barrett wrote:

> steven l. rubenstein stated for the record:
>
>
>> What we need first is a ruling by or concerning the ArbCom that it
>> will consider and pass judgements on content-based disputes, or it
>> will not.  We just need to make this clear, one way or the other.
>>
>
> The ArbComm[0] will neither consider nor pass judgement on content-
> based disputes.  Is that clear enough for you?
>
> [0] For values of "ArbComm" that include [[User:the Epopt]].
>
> --
>  Sean Barrett     | Aw, Mom, you act like I'm not even
>  sean at epoptic.com | wearing a bungee cord! --Calvin
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: steven l. rubenstein

body:
MacGynerMagic wrote ...

>Don't judge the content, but the user conduct. If people keep editing
>without discussing it and trying to reach common ground, you can take
>the case because of conduct.

But there are indeed cases where people keep editing while discussing it ad
infinitum, and discussions may take up over 100 kbs, and still the dispute
is not resolved.  These are disputes where it is simply not enough to judge
behavior; we need to judge the content.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia first and an on-line community
second.  Personal behavior is very important and it is good that we have
mechanisms to deal with conflicts over user conduct.  But content is more
important, and we need mechanisms to deal with conflicts over content.

sannse wrote...

>I have mixed feelings on all this - I see that there are problems, but
>am not fully convinced that the majority of them won't be fixed with a
>little time and a little faith in the good will of editors.  I'm not
>saying we ignore things until they go away, just that a proactive
>solution may give disputes an emphasis that might be harmful - maybe
>without intervention the eventualist approach will work in a lot of cases.
>
>
>But that said, I realise we are in a whole new situation with the
>growing Wikipedia, and maybe what worked a year ago won't do so
>nowadays.  And content does seem to be the key issue in many disputes
>that we have looked at recently.

I agree completely.  I do think most disputes can be and are resolved
through time and good faith.  But the fact remains that some disputes over
content do not get resolved.  In my experience (biased, I acknowledge) this
is usually because the two people have different ideas about what
constitutes research or appropriate sources.  NPOV and NOR may enter into
it, and in some cases these policies alone are sufficient to resolve the
case -- but in some cases, they are not.  In such cases, someone needs to
determine what kind of research has been done, what kinds of sources are
being used, and decide on that basis.  This is the kind of thing ArbCom has
traditionally stayed away from.  At one point (around the time of my
conflict with RJII), some suggested that ArbCom can deal with content
disputes -- but,ultimately, they did not.

We need either a firm commitment that ArbCom will deal with content
disputes, pure and simple, or we need another mechanism.

Steve

Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701


body:
David Gerard wrote ...

>Basically: most of the really poisonous arseholes have in fact been kicked
>off en: Wikipedia, and when new ones show up they are ejected in reasonable
>order. (In a lot of cases, it's not even reaching the AC as they're dealt
>with as obvious vandals and trolls by WP:AN/I.) So now the AC is getting a
>lot of grey-area cases that are really a proxy for a content dispute. What
>to do about this?

David, this is an issue I and others have raised repeatedly over the past
years: many irresolvable disputes center on content, and Wikipedia needs a
mechanism for dealing with these content-based disputes.  Several people
(with some notable exceptions) argued that the ArbCom can handle this, and
should.  RJII on the Capitalism page was an attempt to take those people at
their word, and have the ArbCom handle a content dispute.  Fred Bauder
seemed to be the only one on the ArbCom to take an interest in this
case.  Needless to say, after a month or more of arguing and reverts, I and
several people simply left the capitalism article, to await an ArbCom
decision.  Then the ArbCom declared that, since we had left, there was no
more conflict, so the situation was resolved!

What we need first is a ruling by or concerning the ArbCom that it will
consider and pass judgements on content-based disputes, or it will not.  We
just need to make this clear, one way or the other.

And if ArbCom will not or cannot handle content-based disputes, we need to
develop another committee or mechanism.

I am repeating something I have said several times in the past.  This issue
is not new.

Steve

Steven L. Rubenstein
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701


body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm (macgyvermagic at gmail.com) [050605 08:13]:

> Don't judge the content, but the user conduct. If people keep editing
> without discussing it and trying to reach common ground, you can take
> the case because of conduct. It's the controversial cases in which
> large numbers of people disagree that are the problem. Unfortunately,
> those take time, and can't be properly handled by a small group of
> people (they're probably divided on it themselves).

For an example, check the WMC vs Cortonin case. Can content be decided by
which side explodes in frustration first? I submit that this may not be the
best of ideas.

A lot of it is that the AC has been too effective; so people start dealing
with others as problems to be dealt with, with the AC at the end of the
process. This is not a good attitude either.

- d.


subject: [Wikitech-l] Rating / voting for articles

body:
aerik at thesylvans.com (aerik at thesylvans.com) [050605 08:29]:

> Is there already work in progress for a rating / voting mechanism for articles - perhaps as part of the validation project?  I was thinking that some wikis (particularly wikicity wikis) mike very much like such a feature, and if developed to be configurable, could also be a part of the article validation process.  What I'm thinking of is something that gives one the ability to to epinions style ratings, but configurable from wiki to wiki.  I poked around Meta for awhile, but didn't find anything conclusive.

[[m:Article validation feature]]
[[m:Category:Article validation]]
[[m:En validation topics]]
[[m:De Validierungsthemen]]

It's live on Wikimedia wikis (or at least en: and de: Wikipedias) for 1.5.
You can try it out on http://test.leuksman.com/ - click on 'Validate' in
the Monobook skin.

At the moment nothing is planned to be done with the data other than gather
it, make it viewable (you can view every rating, just like you can view
every edit) and show a numerical average. We'll see what people do with the
test data, then we'll probably write some apps for it, tweak the questions
and then throw away the data and start over.

I think a *lot* of MediaWiki installations will want to play with this
feature.

- d.


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Combined effort

body:
Not so much Hindi though, with over 1000 articles. Tamil and Kannada
are also doing OK, and a couple of others have a couple of hundred
articles but are inactive.

Mark

On 05/06/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> Mark Williamson (node.ue at gmail.com) [050605 10:25]:
>
> > I have only had minimal success in sending out e-mails about inactive
> > Wikipedias.
> > But then, most of the people I e-mail, I don't know.
> > I figure that if each of us knows two or three people who speak
> > languages of inactive Wikipedias, and we each tell all of these people
> > that we know that there is a Wikipedia in their language, the effect
> > would be much greater.
> > So, if you know anybody who speaks one of the following languages,
> > please tell them.
>
> > India: All major languages
>
> All major languages of India?!
>
> That's  ... amazing. (As well as wrong and bad.)
>
> Free software has enough interest for organisations to form (FSF India).
> Perhaps FSF India would be a good place to drop a line about this to.
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Enciclopedia Libre

body:
Yes, it is that one.

Reasons for forking were, if I recall correctly, that we were
discussing (although not seriously considering) adding ads to
Wikipedia, and also the fact that the community is so en.wiki-centric
(I think - this may not've actually been a reason).

A remerge has been suggested, but Enciclopedia Libre (Free
Encyclopaedia) has been resistant and they are, after all, at an
advantage because they have more articles than do we.

Mark

On 05/06/05, Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
> >
> > [Encyclopedia Libre]
> >
> > What software version are they using?  Is there anything we can do to
> > help them?
>
> Assuming Enciclopedia Libre is meant, 1.3.11.
>
> Isn't this the one that was originally a fork of the Spanish Wikipedia?
> I can't remember what the reasons were for forking or for not merging
> back in. Does anyone know? Maybe we should think about encouraging a
> remerge.
>
> Timwi
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject: [Wikipedia-l] US Education system (was NPR interview)

body:
Alex Y. Kwan stated for the record:
> And the way it is taught right now is, well, a mere symptom of a
> pathology in the way Americans think of America and other nations.

Of course, all Americans think of America and other nations in exactly
the same pathological way.

We all think that all foreigners are mindless bigots who think all
Americans think alike.

--
  Sean Barrett     | Aw, Mom, you act like I'm not even
  sean at epoptic.com | wearing a bungee cord! --Calvin


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

body:
On 6/5/05, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6/4/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> > For an example, check the WMC vs Cortonin case. Can
> >content be decided by which side explodes in frustration first? > >I submit that this may not be the best of ideas.

> > A lot of it is that the AC has been too effective; so people start dealing
> > with others as problems to be dealt with, with the AC at the end of the
> > process. This is not a good attitude either.

That's why I want to breath new life into the Mediation Committee. I
think Mediation shouldn't be another step towards banning either party
but a genuine effort at resolving the problem.

--Mgm


subject: [Foundation-l] IEEE LOM

body:
Hi. I find it rather odd that nobody so far seems to have responded to this
interesting proposal. So I am making a modest attempt. I have to admit that
I just ask questions & clarifications mostly, and I am not sure if others
have the same questions.

----- Original Message -----
From: Gerard Meijssen
Sent: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 08:10:53 +0200
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] IEEE LOM

>>However if 50% of the Dutch data is of an universal nature, it would
>>mean that this 50% does not need to be entered for the articles in other languages.
>>Hosting this metadata on the Wikimedia servers makes sense;

I think I want to learn more about this part. What do you mean by the universal data?

Some of the IEEE data are common to all Wikipedia (or Wikimedia) articles/pages so that
they do not have to be manually entered for individual articles/pages separately, but
could simply be implemented at a different level?

>>it allows for the opening up of Free content in a proprietary world.
>>It would make a huge deduction in cost for every second language implementing the IEEE LOM data.

I want to know more about these statements, too.

What are some of the expected benefits of tagging the contents with IEEE LOM? Are you suggesting
many commercial content providers will take Wikipedia contents and offer them as part of their
contents? That sounds good to me (reuse of contents is good in principle in my opinion).

I also wonder about how they will comply with GFDL that requires, among other things, that
contents should not be technically protected for people to read or copy, and that no other
terms than license will be applied. Well, that's their (those commercial content providers)
business to figuire things out, so perhaps the question is not very relevant to our discussion.

>The questions I put to you are:
>*   Are we willing to host open standard meta data for the educational world.
>*   Are we willing to cooperate with organisations that are interested in implementing this data.
>*   How will we manage such things; funds can be found to pay people doing this kind of work - can we consider this
>
>Thanks,
>  GerardM

Am I correct in assuming that what they want is that somehow we (Dutch Wikipedians, or Wikipedians
in general) will tag our contents in the way specified in IEEE LOM? And they will pay for the server and
traffic in return? Is that the deal they are proposing?

Immediate question that I have, in that case, is that:
*Do they want to somehow host the Dutch Wikipedia only, on a separate server?

*Did they consider creating a mirror themselves, and do all the tagging by themselves? In that case,
for good or not, they perhaps need only a few experienced Wikipedians as advisors/consultants. Not
particularly an exciting choice, but could be quite sensible.

Cheers,

Tomos


subject: [Foundation-l] IEEE LOM


from_name: Daniel Mayer

body:
--- "steven l. rubenstein" <rubenste at ohiou.edu> wrote:
> What we need first is a ruling by or concerning the ArbCom that it will
> consider and pass judgements on content-based disputes, or it will not.  We
> just need to make this clear, one way or the other.

Going into the realm of deciding content disputes is something that the
community and Jimbo will need to sign off on. It is not just a matter of the
ArbCom ruling it so to make it so. We don't have that authority.

Nor is such a small body of people competent in the number of areas of
knowledge needed to make this workable.  I, for example, know very little about
advanced mathematics so I would be unable to judge a content dispute in that
area without spending a very, very long time on research.

> And if ArbCom will not or cannot handle content-based disputes, we need to
> develop another committee or mechanism.

This is not an either/or situation. My plan is for the ArbCom to consult
various content specialist subcommittees when content issues arise.

See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/RFC#Alternate_solution_.238_by_mav._Content_subcommittee

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)

__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Find restaurants, movies, travel and more fun for the weekend. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/weekend.html


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Ellywa's Law

body:
Can Ellywa's Law be stated, or is it completely ineffable?

--
  Sean Barrett     | Great literature deals with the universal
  sean at epoptic.com | themes of love and war. Trashy fiction
                   | is just full of sex and violence.


from_name: Pavol Cupka

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: Namespace in Friulian Wiki

body:
Hi, IMHO you can by editing the Language file and then submitting them
to the developers. Go to for example
http://cvs.defau.lt/phase3/languages and make changes to the
corresponding languageXx.php file.

On 6/4/05, A. Decorte <klenje at adriacom.it> wrote:
> I'm sorry if this is a duplicate request, since I have already posted in
> bugzilla, but there was no answer... the question is simple, who can I
> contact
> to change Namespaces? who can do this?
> Thank you
> Andre
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l at wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>

--
Palica
http://sk.wikipedia.org/User:Palica
Nezabudni si vzia? svoje Wikam?ny. / Don't forget to take your
Wikamins today. - Palica
http://sk.wikipedia.org - slobodn? encyklop?dia, ktor? m??e ka?d?
upravova? - AJ TY


from_name: Michael Snow

subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Arbitration Commitee Seeking Comment

body:
Rebecca wrote:

>On 6/5/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>That's why I want to breath new life into the Mediation Committee. I
>>think Mediation shouldn't be another step towards banning either party
>>but a genuine effort at resolving the problem.
>>
>>--Mgm
>>
>>
>The point is that it didn't work before, and there's been no idea of
>how to fix the issue that ruined things before - that none of us are
>trained mediators, and most of us simply did not have the skills to
>bring antagonistic, warring parties together. We'd all like a
>mediation committee that worked, but wishing doesn't necessarily make
>it so.
>
>
I don't think the problem with mediation is a lack of training or skills
(no offense, but by and large I wouldn't call the arbitrators
professionally trained either). Mediation can be handled by anybody with
good sense, patience, and the ability to resist getting over-agitated by
the emotions of the disputing parties. We actually have had quite a few
instances of successful mediation, but many of them have happened
outside the formal process, often handled by people who are not part of
the Mediation Committee.

However, I agree that formal mediation is not working terribly well for
us. One of the biggest challenges for Wikipedia mediation is simply the
fact that we're stuck in an online, text-only medium. This affects
mediation more dramatically than the other dispute resolution processes,
because it takes away a key element of what normally makes mediation
successful.

One of the reasons mediation works is because it brings the parties
together, *face-to-face* and with an observer present. This brings into
play all kinds of social inhibitions that force the parties to tone down
their hostility and aggression. The resulting atmosphere is much more
conducive for the mediator and the parties to work together and find a
mutually acceptable solution.

Wikipedia mediation doesn't have a feasible way to recreate these
conditions, and I doubt that even real-time communication via IRC can
overcome this handicap. The lowered barriers against being deliberately
offensive and the ease of miscommunication when using text are too great
a challenge. As a result, I think that for us mediation is more likely
to be useful much earlier in the process, as disputes are only beginning
and before they have really had a chance to heat up. This would require
watching more closely for situations where mediation can help, and a
more interventionist approach from the mediators, rather than waiting
for cases to come to them.

--Michael Snow


from_name: Stirling Newberry

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
On Jun 5, 2005, at 10:21 AM, Cormac Lawler wrote:

> On 6/4/05, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:
>
>> My daughter recently asked Danny why the word 'receipt' has a 'p' in
>> it.
>>  Well, he gave a decent answer but I think he made it up out of thin
>> air.
>> That's the best that most of us can do, even very well educated and
>> smart people.
>>
>
> The p is silent as in psychology, or swimming ;)
>
> C
>

The word combines two previous vulgate words, one for a list of
ingredients(receit), the other for receive (recipere). A receipt is
then a recitation of what you are the recipient of.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Enciclopedia Libre

body:
Mark Williamson wrote:

>A remerge has been suggested, but Enciclopedia Libre (Free
>Encyclopaedia) has been resistant and they are, after all, at an
>advantage because they have more articles than do we.
>
>
Where are you getting this information? From what I know, the Spanish
Wikipedia passed Enciclopedia Libre in terms of article count a long
time ago. The counts currently stated on their main pages are 50,508
(es.wikipedia.org) versus 28,165 (enciclopedia.us.es).

I do agree that being friendly and supportive is much more likely to
bring them back in, on their own timetable, than trying to push the
issue too much.

--Michael Snow


from_name: Jean-Baptiste Soufron

subject: [Wikipedia-l] link for complaints

body:
I totally support your idea.

I am on irc and on juriwiki-l on a 24/24 basis to answer legal issues
as best as I can and tell people when I can't, but people seem to
come mainly by luck or because someone else told them.

It would not be difficult to precise in every page that authors are
responsible for what they write and that they should get some advice
if they don't feel comfortable with something, assuming that we don't
endorse any editing role or whatever... just mention that we exist if
they have nothing else.

I am certain that simply adding such a precision would greatly
improve the legal security on wikipedia.

Le 3 juin 05 ? 17:12, David Monniaux a ?crit :

> I think that all Wikipedia pages should contain somewhere (say, at the
> bottom) a link to a page where people could complain about the content
> of the articles. (I'm talking here of complaints about breach of
> privacy, copyright violation, libel etc.)
>
> Currently, people have nowhere clear to go to. We get messages on the
> Village Pump or equivalent, by private email to participants (often
> unrelated to the articles), by emails to the Foundation board, by
> email
> to public mailing lists.
>
> This, to me, is deeply unsatisfactory:
> * By providing no obvious way for people to complain about
> articles, we
> give the impression of some unreliable, irresponsible group.
> * While people look for a way to contact us, they become
> frustrated. As
> a result, their complaint may become unnecessarily accusatory and
> angry.
> * We also incite people to make legal threats to get some attention.
> * When people write to public lists, they attract undue attention to
> issues that should be better dealt with in the calm - some
> inflammatory
> email with legal threats will result in some angry answers, and all
> can
> escalate.
> * If people have a really legitimate problem, they have little
> recourse.
>
> You will say, hey, they can simply edit the wiki. This simply does not
> work. Many people don't understand the editing process and simply
> can't
> do it. Furthermore, some well-meaning contributors may see their
> awkward
> efforts as "vandalism" and revert them. This gives people the
> impression
> that their edits are refused or that some "censorship" is implemented.
>
> This is not imaginary. I'll spare you the details, but within one week
> the French association mailing-list received legal threats from two
> sources, both alleging bad treatment from Wikipedia. In both cases,
> the
> legal claims are dubious; but they can be an annoyance and would be
> better dealt with in a friendly agreement than if lawyers get
> involved.
>
> Somebody remarked to me that we could, as many professional sites
> have,
> have a complaint page. The user would first have to answer some
> multiple-choice questions, meant for weeding out "non urgent"
> complaints
> (i.e. things such as "the birth date of XXX is incorrect"); or, these
> complaints could be sent to the talk page. Finally, if the reason
> seems
> to fit a legitimate "sensitive" category, they would have a form open
> for typing their message or would obtain some link to a complaint
> email
> address.
>
> I think that as we become one of the foremost Internet sites, we will
> have more of the sort. We should have means so that simple problems
> don't escalate into full blown confrontations. Remember that even
> if we
> win, that's still a lot of frustration and lost time.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] link for complaints

body:
I am already doing it on irc for fr: and sometimes also for other
people. I am also volunteering on juriwiki-l where we have something
like 4 or 5 IP lawyers more or less available.

Anyway, nobody should "handle" things, but it would great to give a
minimum level of advice when people have no idea of how to react and
no legal assistance on their own.

Le 3 juin 05 ? 17:51, Sean Barrett a ?crit :

> David Monniaux stated for the record:
>
>
>> I think that all Wikipedia pages should contain somewhere (say, at
>> the
>> bottom) a link to a page where people could complain about the
>> content
>> of the articles. (I'm talking here of complaints about breach of
>> privacy, copyright violation, libel etc.)
>>
>
> Thank you for volunteering to handle all these complaints promptly
> and without pay.
>
> --
>  Sean Barrett     | The capo gives part of his plan to one,
>  sean at epoptic.com | part to another, the whole to none.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


subject:
[[Help]] sidebar link to [[Help / Contact us]] (was Re:
	[Wikipedia-l] link for complaints)

body:
You're right, it should not be a "complaint" link but rather a "help"
link.

And it should send both to the relevant mailing-lists and irc channels.

Le 4 juin 05 ? 01:24, Daniel Mayer a ?crit :

> Cross posted to WikiEn-l since I plan to tweak en.wiki's interface
> a tiny bit.
> --- David Monniaux <David.Monniaux at ens.fr> wrote:
>
>> Personally, I think that having clear complaint links reduces our
>> risk
>> of getting sued or at least of getting served legal summons by
>> angry and
>> frustrated people.
>>
>
> I would not call it a 'complaint link' since I (and I imagine many
> others)
> don't want to encourage complaints, per se. We can, however,
> largely fix the
> apparent-lack-of-feedback-mechanism issue *right now* by editing
> [[MediaWiki:Help]] to read 'Help / Contact us' instead of just
> 'Help'. I've
> already made some small changes the the English Wikipedia's
> [[help:Contents]]
> page to make this hack work (ideally 'Help' and 'Contact us' would
> each link to
> their own pages, but that is not possible).
>
> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents and
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Help (where I've
> already said I
> will do this in two days).
>
> That should tide us over until/if we get the generic footer message
> MediaWiki
> page I was talking about in my last email (where multiple links and/
> or messages
> could be displayed - not unlike [[MediaWiki:Sitenotice]], except
> most of the
> links would be there all the time).
>
> -- mav
>
> __________________________________________________
> 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
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: GFDL Clarification

references:
<Pine.LNX.4.61.0505271324140.4830@mimosa.opentrend.net>	<d7ajq0$887$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<d7kab6$s7r$1@sea.gmane.org> <d7sfvg$o7a$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Exactly,

the good way to do would be to ask the permission to use the content
in wikip?dia AND to provide a link to the GFDL.

Le 4 juin 05 ? 17:08, Timwi a ?crit :

> Suppose I write an article and then allow you to "use it" on
> Wikipedia under the restriction that you may not make any
> modifications to it.  It is hopefully clear to you now that the
> text cannot be used in Wikipedia, even though I gave permission to
> "use it".
>
> It is only your summarisation that reduces it to the point where it
> seems contradictory (but isn't actually). Just because someone
> agreed for something to be used on Wikipedia, does not necessarily
> mean that it can be (or should be) used on Wikipedia.  In a way, by
> saying that it is contradictory, you're only stating that you don't
> understand it.
>
> Timwi


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: GFDL Clarification

body:
Yup but that's not possible under french legislation (for example).

Le 5 juin 05 ? 00:48, Timwi a ?crit :

> Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
>> We need a clear statement [...] that the photos are released _by
>> the copyright holders_ under the GNU FDL. "It's fine to use this"
>> is not
>> enough.
>>
>
> Unfortunately, many people in this thread have forgotten the option
> of public domain. If you just ask the copyright holder something
> like "do you forgo your copyright?" or perhaps even "can anyone use
> it for any purpose whatsoever?" then they are not only much more
> likely to give an informed answer, but in the case of a "yes" it's
> even more useful. We all know that the problems with the GNU FDL
> are even worse for images. How would you use a GFDL image in a
> (new) printed document?
>
> The images I have contributed are [crap, but at least] public
> domain. :)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
On Jun 5, 2005, at 11:27 AM, Timwi wrote:

> Stirling Newberry wrote:
>> Consider being able to earn one's degree by writing on wikipedia.
>
> Once all articles relating to a particular topic are featured
> articles, there isn't much left to do for other prospective graduates
> of the same subject.
>
> Timwi

That is a problem to be looked forward to.


from_name: Delirium

body:
Sj wrote:

>At the second "Signal or Noise" conference, a museum curator stated
>explicitly that many museums consider their images of their artwork to
>be copyrightable and copyrighted; they sell postcards, posters, etc of
>those images. They spend money curating the works of art, and
>commissioning the photos, and want to be able to recoup that.  (I am
>more or less repeating verbatim arguments I heard).
>
>
That much is true, if they are "creative works" rather than verbatim
copies, which is the gray area.

Interestingly, not all museums follow the anti-information-dissemination
route.  All of Greece's national museums permit free photography without
a permit to all visitors, with the caveat that no flash is permitted (to
avoid either damaging the pieces or irritating visitors with incessant
flashes).

This leads to the interesting situation where Greek artifacts in Greece
are free to photograph, but Greek artifacts stolen by colonial UK and
France demand further tribute to have photographs taken of them!

-Mark


from_name: Robert Jones

subject: [Wikitech-l] phpbb logged in tag

body:
Thanks for the recent advice on including php. I've made a modification to
my installation of mediawiki that uses <loggedin> </loggedin> to only
display what is within the tags if the person is logged in to their account.
I am now trying to make a different tag to display what is between a a pair
of tags only if a person with their IP address is listed as logged in on my
local installation of phpBB.

I can ask the logged in question on a normal php page by including this at
the top:

<?php

define('IN_PHPBB', true);

$phpbb_root_path = './forum/';

include($phpbb_root_path . 'extension.inc');

include($phpbb_root_path . 'common.'.$phpEx);

$userdata = session_pagestart($user_ip, PAGE_INDEX);

init_userprefs($userdata);

?>

and this to display the alternatives:

<?php

if( $userdata['session_logged_in'] )

{ echo('Logged in'); }

else { echo('Not logged in'); }

?>

Does anyone know of a similar extension that queries another database from
within mediawiki?

Thanks in advance.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Automatic image tagging

body:
Magnus Manske stated for the record:

> So I thought, why not, upon upload of a new image, *automatically* add
> "{{unverified}}" to any image dewscription that does *not* contain the
> sequence "{{"? This is dead easy technically, and will bring untagged
> images to our attention without wasting time and effort of people who
> could do something more constructive.

I like this idea a whole lot.

--
  Sean Barrett     | These go to eleven. It's one louder, isn't
  sean at epoptic.com | it? It's not ten. --Nigel of Spinal Tap


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Automatic image tagging

body:
Magnus Manske stated for the record:

> Some can be tagged correctly without the original uploader:
> * fair use
> * where a suitable source is given
> * images that are obviously PD because of age
> and probably some other cases.

US Government-created public domain as well.

--
  Sean Barrett     | These go to eleven. It's one louder, isn't
  sean at epoptic.com | it? It's not ten. --Nigel of Spinal Tap


body:
Tony Sidaway stated for the record:

> steven l. rubenstein said:
>
>>David, this is an issue I and others have raised repeatedly over the
>>past  years: many irresolvable disputes center on content, and
>>Wikipedia needs a  mechanism for dealing with these content-based
>>disputes.
>
>
> Why?  If the disputes are irresolvable, why is it necessary to bring in a
> deus ex machina to declare a resolution?  Isn't it just more honest to
> leave the irresolvable unresolved?  I find this, the current way, quite
> satisfactory and if the arbcom really is accepting cases that are in the
> realm of content disputes then they should simply be more parsimonious in
> the kind of dispute they accept.

No dispute is irresolvable once you get past that archaic idea of NPOV
and accept OTPOV -- the One True Point of View.

--
  Sean Barrett     | These go to eleven. It's one louder, isn't
  sean at epoptic.com | it? It's not ten. --Nigel of Spinal Tap


from_name: Anthere

body:
David Gerard a ?crit:
> Jimmy Wales (jwales at wikia.com) [050605 07:15]:
>
>
>>It is my estimate based on attending technology conventions and
>>Wikimedia meetups that Wikipedia is less male dominated than free
>>software and tech generally, but still male dominated to an unfortunate
>>extent.
>
>
>
> As far as we can tell discussing the topic on #wikipedia, Wikipedia is run
> by a homosexual conspiracy. And the ones that aren't are transgender. IT'S
> THE WIKIPEDIANS! THEY'RE IN IT WITH THE MARTIANS!
>
>
> - d.

Nod. And when neither male homosexuals, nor transgenders, they are
females. Ick.


body:
James D. Forrester a ?crit:
> On Saturday, 4th June, 2005, at 22:28, David 'DJ' Hedley
> <spyders at btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Indeed, the amount of openly LGBT Wikipedians is interestingly high. I
>>don't know why Wikipedia is so appealing to homosexual contributors, but
>>it appears to be that it is.
>
>
> I'm not entirely sure that this is anything more than a combination of two
> factors; firstly, that people are likely to feel much less intimidated into
> concealing their 'defects' [0], and so be more open about themselves; and,
> secondly, the high-tech world in general and on-line communities in
> particular do tend [1] to attract a rather larger proportion in population
> of non-"heteronormative" [2]. It has been theorised [3] that this may be due
> to a greater level of emotional and general 'intelligence' required to
> access social networks of this type, which means that such people are more
> likely to be able to think of themselves as different. Personally, I'm not
> so sure about this, and the former seems more of a 'goer'.
>
> [0] - In their own fears of others' opinions.
> [1] - Or, rather, used to, in days of yore when usenet was a bless?d place
>       of tranquility. Umm. :-)
> [2] - Oh, ye gods, how I detest that term.
> [3] - But quite possibly not by anyone encyclop?dic. ;-)
>
> Yours,

I loved this mail :-)

ant


from_name: Gregory Maxwell

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Ellywa's Law

body:
On 6/5/05, Sean Barrett <sean at epoptic.org> wrote:
> Can Ellywa's Law be stated, or is it completely ineffable?

Perhaps thats the point?


body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm a ?crit:
> On 6/5/05, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 6/4/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
>>
>>>For an example, check the WMC vs Cortonin case. Can
>>>content be decided by which side explodes in frustration first? > >I submit that this may not be the best of ideas.
>>
>
>>>A lot of it is that the AC has been too effective; so people start dealing
>>>with others as problems to be dealt with, with the AC at the end of the
>>>process. This is not a good attitude either.
>>
>
> That's why I want to breath new life into the Mediation Committee. I
> think Mediation shouldn't be another step towards banning either party
> but a genuine effort at resolving the problem.
>
> --Mgm

I think the main issue with the MC is somehow its bureaucratic level. I
realise now that an issue is more likely to be resolved amiably when

* it is quickly handled, before the escalation occur and anger gets so
high editors are no more willing to compromise. The necessity of having
to make an official request, then wait with no one stepping is very
detrimental to the whole process. I think it works better when editors
contact directly a person.

* people know and feel confortable to the one they are asking help.
And... that is a bit unfortunate to say, but I fear this is true : they
like the person to have a sort of authority. They come to the mediator
thinking the mediator can make the decision for them... and it may be
the mediator job to make it happen that the editors themselves come to
the agreement.

If Linuxbeak is reading this, I think he will understand what I mean. I
think he asked help of an "arbitrator" to resolve his tripartite problem
between himself, the community and the CAP. But in the end, all what I
did is just to talk with him, clarify certain things, suggested
solutions...  However, He made the decision himself. So, it was only the
job of a mediator/facilitator after all.


body:
David Gerard a ?crit:
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm (macgyvermagic at gmail.com) [050605 17:52]:
>
>
>>That's why I want to breath new life into the Mediation Committee. I
>>think Mediation shouldn't be another step towards banning either party
>>but a genuine effort at resolving the problem.
>
>
>
> Mediation is good, but it's hard to make mediation into a part of a formal
> process. [[WP:TINMC]] being officially unofficial is probably the right
> approach, for example.
>
>
> - d.

Agreed. Ant


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Automatic image tagging

body:
On 6/5/05, Magnus Manske <magnus.manske at web.de> wrote:
> So I thought, why not, upon upload of a new image, *automatically* add
> "{{unverified}}" to any image dewscription that does *not* contain the
> sequence "{{"? This is dead easy technically, and will bring untagged
> images to our attention without wasting time and effort of people who
> could do something more constructive.

A good idea, but I'm concerned that users will just guess a license
when they are fixing unverified images. It is already the case that
wikipedia has many images incorrectly tagged.

Most of the time only the uploader can identify the copyright except
in the rare case of an historically notable image that we're using as
fair use... For other case it would take more effort to locate the
source (if it's even possible) than to replace the image, and in many
of the cases where the image wasn't notable but we could find it
without the uploader the image will not be free for us to use.

Because of this the unverified template need to instruct users not to
add the license. Users should hunt down the uploader and get the
uploader to set it. If the uploader is not available we should dump
the image.


from_name: Mark Pellegrini

body:
Mav wrote: "Going into the realm of deciding content disputes is something that the
community and Jimbo will need to sign off on. It is not just a matter of the
ArbCom ruling it so to make it so. We don't have that authority."

Actually, Snowspinner made a comment on the RFC saying (correctly, I believe) that we
are allowed to do that under the arbitration rules, as ratified by the community. On
the other hand, (as I described *in detail* in my problem description) we have avoided
doing that for fear of concentrating too much power in a single group of users. Also,
we're not comptent to do it, either (although, again as I said in my lengthy problem
description, in many of these cases it is obvious even to a lay man which side is
advocating crackpottery)

I agree with Mav's comment that this isn't a black or white thing, though, and I am
keeping an open mind as to possible solutions (although I remain unconvinced by
arguments put forth by Tony Sideaway-et-al in favor of more-of-the-same -- keeping the
status quo and/or reforming the mediation commitee). Tony's arguement is a sort of optomistic
eventualism (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Eventualism). In other words, ignore the problem,
let the users fight it out, come back in a year, and the article will have improved...
probably. I find this to be a trite and downright lazy response to a real problem. Yes, it is
true that in a year, the article will have probably improved. In the meantime, however, good
users become frustrated from tangling with POV pushers (Think of Adam Carr as the
canonical example, although lesser disputes like this arise on AIDS (with HIV deniars) and
Evolution (fucking creationists), and the people there too become burned out). What
do you tell someone who edits these articles when a new user comes along, and obviously starts
pushing an agenda? It's very easy to view Wikipedia from 2,000 miles high and say everything
is fine and getting better, but it's a bit less rosy when you actually come down to earth
and actually have to deal with someone like this. In such a case, I don't think Tony's plan
for strategic do-nothingness is the best solution -- I certainly think we can do better.

On the other hand, I think having the arbcom bring in content advisors is an idea with
potential. It's got all the makings of a workable solution -- it's simple, and it avoids
the problem we are most trying to avoid (the excess concentration of power I mentioned).

--Mark


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Enciclopedia Libre

body:
Oops.

I was thinking of another non-English semifork of Wikipedia which has
way more articles than the Wikipedia version, and whose owner is
deeply involved in Wikipedia but while bragging in private e-mails and
on-list about how much work he/she does compared to others to put more
free content online, does not consider allowing the corresponding
language version of Wikipedia to share content.

*cough*

Mark

On 05/06/05, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Mark Williamson wrote:
>
> >A remerge has been suggested, but Enciclopedia Libre (Free
> >Encyclopaedia) has been resistant and they are, after all, at an
> >advantage because they have more articles than do we.
> >
> >
> Where are you getting this information? From what I know, the Spanish
> Wikipedia passed Enciclopedia Libre in terms of article count a long
> time ago. The counts currently stated on their main pages are 50,508
> (es.wikipedia.org) versus 28,165 (enciclopedia.us.es).
>
> I do agree that being friendly and supportive is much more likely to
> bring them back in, on their own timetable, than trying to push the
> issue too much.
>
> --Michael Snow
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Indian languages and grants (was Re: Combined
	effort)

body:
Ooh! Ooh! Georgian!! And Lao!! And Syriac (aramaic)!!!!!111 yay!~!11

Mark

On 05/06/05, Patrick Hall <pathall at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's worth mentioning that there are a few languages which are new to
> the web that are mostly encoded in Unicode -- Amharic comes to mind.
> There is Amharic content produced both within and outside of Ethiopia
> in Unicode. As opposed to Hindi, for which there are a multiplicity of
> legacy encodings.
>
> Encouraging Wikipedias in such languages may early may pay dividends,
> since it's likely that users that read existing content will be have
> fonts installed already (input is another issue).
>
> -Patrick Hall
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration Committee Seeking Comment

body:
Mav wrote,

>Going into the realm of deciding content disputes is something that the
>community and Jimbo will need to sign off on. It is not just a matter of the
>ArbCom ruling it so to make it so. We don't have that authority.
>Nor is such a small body of people competent in the number of areas of
>knowledge needed to make this workable. I, for example, know very little
>about
>advanced mathematics so I would be unable to judge a content dispute in that
>area without spending a very, very long time on research.

I agree completely

> > And if ArbCom will not or cannot handle content-based disputes, we need to
> > develop another committee or mechanism.
>This is not an either/or situation. My plan is for the ArbCom to consult
>various content specialist subcommittees when content issues arise.
>See
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/RFC#Alternate_solution_.238_by_mav._Content_subcommittee
>
>Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I agree about babies and bathwater.  I also like Mav's proposal.  And I
like Jguks.  I see them as complementary -- Jguk's focusing on enforcing
existing policies that are specifically content-related (NPOV, NOR, Cite
Sources, Verifiability) and Mav's focusing on ensuring the high quality of
our articles, in general.  Right now it would probably be too unwieldy to
enact both proposals, but I bet that as this community grows larger (say,
in a year, possibly two) both proposals, with very clearly defined briefs,
would be useful and practical.

Steve

Steven L. Rubenstein
Associate Professor
Department of Sociology and Anthropology
Bentley Annex
Ohio University
Athens, Ohio 45701


from_name: Timwi

subject: [Wikitech-l] Re: possible interwiki solution

references:
<d7s71u$3la$1@sea.gmane.org> <d7sci3$g1q$1@sea.gmane.org>
	<d7sgqi$q7h$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Elly Waterman wrote:
>
> If there is no lookalike article in another language, you just should
> not link to it. I think these problems will also be diminished by a
> central database, at least they get more clearly visible.

That's your POV. Other people disagree. If you are going to implement
some technical solution to a problem, you can't just say "if everyone
follows _my_ opinion, the problem is solved".


from_name: Cormac Lawler

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
On 6/4/05, Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote:

> My daughter recently asked Danny why the word 'receipt' has a 'p' in it.
>  Well, he gave a decent answer but I think he made it up out of thin air.
> That's the best that most of us can do, even very well educated and
> smart people.
>

The p is silent as in psychology, or swimming ;)

C


subject: [WikiEN-l] Re: Redress against personal attack?

body:
Josh Gordon wrote:
> Reminds me of something I saw a few times on the highways outside of Tokyo a
> few years ago. An impatient driver cuts off another driver; the driver who
> had been cut off gestures an apology, as if to say "Excuse me for being so
> rude as to put you in a position in which you felt it necessary to cut me
> off."

Heh. And in Britain, you can get people to say "Sorry" by stepping on
their foot.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Enciclopedia Libre

body:
Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
> [Encyclopedia Libre]
>
> What software version are they using?  Is there anything we can do to
> help them?

Assuming Enciclopedia Libre is meant, 1.3.11.

Isn't this the one that was originally a fork of the Spanish Wikipedia?
I can't remember what the reasons were for forking or for not merging
back in. Does anyone know? Maybe we should think about encouraging a
remerge.

Timwi


from_name: Brion Vibber

subject: [Wikitech-l] dump format

body:
elwp at gmx.de wrote:
> Not only history blobs can benefit from splitting revision
> texts into sections and sorting them. The sizes of XML exported
> pages (with complete page histories) can also be reduced.
>
> This is the current structure (only relevant tags):
>
> <page>
>   <revision><text>text0</text></revision>
>   <revision><text>text1</text></revision>
> </page>
>
> This would be the new structure:
>
> <page>
>
sectiontext0

>
sectiontext1

>
sectiontext2

>   <revision><text type="sectionlist">0 1</text></revision>
>   <revision><text type="sectionlist">0 2</text></revision>
> </page>

Can you show that this does significantly better than gzip? Certainly it
won't simplify dump processing.

-- brion vibber
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/attachments/20050605/d434447b/attachment.pgp>


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: An idea

body:
Stirling Newberry wrote:
>
> Consider being able to earn one's degree by writing on wikipedia.

Once all articles relating to a particular topic are featured articles,
there isn't much left to do for other prospective graduates of the same
subject.

Timwi


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: GFDL Clarification

body:
Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:
> Yup but that's not possible under french legislation (for example).

While I'm not an expert in French legislation, I highly doubt that it
prohibits allowing other people to use your work for any purpose
whatsoever. They might consider it a licence as opposed to public
domain, but that doesn't make a difference in practice.

Timwi


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Scheduled global downtime

body:
Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On 6/4/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>What I wonder is, in moves like this, why are they all moved at the
>>same time? Why not move half, and then after we get _those_ up and
>>running again move the other half?
>
> You can't make a subnet appear in multiple places without ugly hackery
> and an extra network connection (tunnels, perhaps address translation,
> maybe origami routing).

I think Mark was envisaging a process where you move half of the servers
and set them up, then flip a switch so that from now on, the public will
be accessing the servers in the new location and no longer the old. Then
you extend the new location with the remaining half of the hardware. You
would never need to have two places function at the same time.

Timwi


body:
Tim Starling wrote:

>Choice of language is a political
>issue, see e.g.
>
>http://www.languageinindia.com/feb2004/langnewsfeb2004.html
>
>I think the production of content accessible to less well educated
>people who aren't connected to the Internet is a goal in line with
>Wikipedia's mission. Much closer to our mission than a producing a
>species database, in any case. Perhaps there might be funding available
>for generating content in these languages.
>
>
There are, of course, two solutions to this problem.  One is to help
less-well-educated people become better educated, which in India means
learning English (or, to some extent, Hindi).  The other is to produce
content in less-widely-spoken languages of India.

As you noted, the choice is a political one, and I'm not sure we ought
to be in the business of running political campaigns.  Providing
resources for anyone to work on a Wikipedia in any language they choose,
sure; but to actively promote the use of particular languages over other
languages isn't our place.

-Mark


from_name: Walter van Kalken

body:
>
>It's pretty arrogant to think that providers will actually lose
>customers due to this, it's far more likely that we'll lose users and
>editors.
>
>Even in the case that a customer would be annoyed enough at the
>provider (rather than us), there are many people who don't have a
>choice.
>___________________________
>
Like in my case. Switching provider would cost me my combinationcontract
through which I get mobele phone, landline and internet combined with a
good discount. I wouldn't be able to pay for all 3 if I had to pay
seperate. There are more people like me in that situation

Waerth/Walter

*disclaimer*
Sorry for bringing it up time and time and time again.


from_name: Yann Forget

body:
Hi,

Le Sunday 5 June 2005 16:11, Tim Starling a ?crit :
> David Gerard wrote:
> > All major languages of India?!
> >
> > That's  ... amazing. (As well as wrong and bad.)
> >
> > Free software has enough interest for organisations to form (FSF India).
> > Perhaps FSF India would be a good place to drop a line about this to.

FSF India and local LUGs are usually well aware of Wikipedia.

> The Indian language wikis suffer from the fact that most of the people
> in India with Internet access speak English. In fact, according to this
> article:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1719346.stm
>
> ...most keyboards in India have a US layout, and keyboards designed for
> Indian languages are unstandardized. Choice of language is a political
> issue, see e.g.
>
> http://www.languageinindia.com/feb2004/langnewsfeb2004.html
>
> I think the production of content accessible to less well educated
> people who aren't connected to the Internet is a goal in line with
> Wikipedia's mission. Much closer to our mission than a producing a
> species database, in any case. Perhaps there might be funding available
> for generating content in these languages.
>
> I think it would be great if Wikimedia could ignore distracting grant
> opportunities to provide content for already well-resourced populations,
> such as biologists or American 10 year olds, and concentrate on its core
> premise. We have a method for cheap content generation, now how can we
> use that method to do the most good? How can we use scarce funds as
> leverage?
>
> Perhaps the answer in the Indian case is with advertising, promotion and
> lobbying. We could start with a small budget in the $10-20K range, spent
> mostly on market research and promotion. Then we could use statistical
> measures of the success of that campaign to request the funding of a
> full-time administrative position and a continuation or scaling up of
> the advertising.
>
> -- Tim Starling

I agree very much with Tim and I am very interested to work on this.
I?have started looking for language specialists in Indian universites and
other local personal contacts which could act as local lobbyists. But it
seems that the problem is even more complicated than explained by Tim.

Many people in India are still using old computers with Win9x which are not
Unicode compliant. The majority of Indian language web sites are still using
proprietary fonts which only work on Windows. This is a vicious circle:
people can't switch to free software because their computer doesn't support
it and/or because they can't read the existing web sites with it. These web
sites are not interested to switch to Unicode, open standard and free fonts
because they have a captive audience. It seems that most Indian language web
sites using Unicode are not based in India (BBC, American universities,
Wikipedia, etc.). Since there is very little Unicode content, users stay with
non Unicode systems.

So a multi-step approach is needed. Lobbying both content providers and users.
Providing users with an alternative which allows them to access Unicode
content and proprietary system: live CD, double boots, etc.

Yann

--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop?die libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux


list: wiktionary-l

subject: [Wiktionary-l] Re: GNU-FDL and Ultimate Wiktionary

references:
<42999E86.6090106@wikia.com>
	<429A1CEB.9020604@telus.net>	<429A24FE.2040307@wikia.com>
	<429AB67C.3080205@telus.net>	<op.srlbcnxm2okkek@arcadia.hsd1.co.comcast.net>	<429DA5C3.9040701@telus.net>	<op.srpzf6wi2okkek@arcadia.hsd1.co.comcast.net>	<429E865B.9050407@gmail.com>
	<op.srqb2p0e2okkek@arcadia.hsd1.co.comcast.net>

body:
Muke Tever wrote:
>
> I prefer that no information be given than wrong information or
> information that has not been checked.

Gosh, you must be hating Wikipedia. ;-)

And the wiki process in general.


from_name: Michael Keppler

subject: [Wikitech-l] phpbb logged in tag

body:
Robert Jones schrieb:
> Does anyone know of a similar extension that queries another database from
> within mediawiki?

You could query the database directly (if database abstraction is not
necessary for you), as I did in my Auth_phpBB plugin. Just include the
configuration file of phpbb to get the database configuration values
(host, user, password etc.) and read the values directly from the user
table using the php mysql functions (or whatever database you use).

Ciao, Michael.


from_name: Zordsdavini iz Litvy

subject: [Wikipedia-l] addind new language into wikipedia

body:
hello world,
I want to start new language (Samogitian) in wikipedia. Where are
about 0.5 million samogitians in west Lithuania and about another 0.5
million understand. The 3 letter language code for Samogitian could be
"smg" so the URL should be http://smg.wikipedia.org. I am a native
speaker and know the requirement for samogitian in web. It would be
good start for computerisation this language :-D

Arns
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Zordsdavini


from_name: Tim Starling

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Re: Email authentication on Wikimedia wikis + Single
	user sign-on

body:
Brion Vibber wrote:
> I'm not sure what Tim is referring to.
>
> There's support for using a shared user table for multiple wikis; that
> can't be used for our sites as it came two years or so too late.
> Accounts are already established separately on each wiki which can't be
> automatically resolved in a clean way, so this has never been an option.

Yes it can. We've talked about conflict resolution methods before. We
merge accounts that are the same person, remove clashing accounts that
have no contributions and for the small percentage of genuine clashes,
I've suggested allocating them on a first-come first-served basis and
requiring the others to change their name. Others have suggested giving
the name to the person who most deserves it, as judged by some as yet
unspecified process involving discretion.

This is why JeLuF split off the user_rights table, so that we could
implement shared usernames but have permissions local to each wiki.

It's not clean, but it's not impossible. And in the long term it will
leave us with a very good user experience. As I said, it requires
conversion software and system administrator bravery.

-- Tim Starling


from_name: Patrick Hall

body:
It's worth mentioning that there are a few languages which are new to
the web that are mostly encoded in Unicode -- Amharic comes to mind.
There is Amharic content produced both within and outside of Ethiopia
in Unicode. As opposed to Hindi, for which there are a multiplicity of
legacy encodings.

Encouraging Wikipedias in such languages may early may pay dividends,
since it's likely that users that read existing content will be have
fonts installed already (input is another issue).

-Patrick Hall


from_name: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason

subject:
[Wikitech-l] Switch on wikien-l moderation again instead of
	rejection?

body:
On 6/4/05, David Gerard <fun at thingy.apana.org.au> wrote:
> ?var Arnfj?r? Bjarmason (avarab at gmail.com) [050605 06:57]:
>
> > How about configuring it to reject all mail from persons not
> > subscribed to the list and send a message somewhat like "sorry, you're
> > not subscribed to this list, please do so at *yadayadayada*...",
> > that's what I did for wikiis-l after the spam got too much for my
> > taste.
>
>
> I went looking for that message (what gets sent to unsubscribed posters) in
> the Mailman interface and couldn't find it. That would also be suitable as
> a solution. Where's the message?

I'm not surprised that you didn't find it, I had a hard time finding
it myself when I was setting it up, I should have included
instructions on how to do it in my original message but I was in a
hurry.

Anyway, go to http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/admin/wikien-l/general
=> Privacy options => Sender filters and change:
* default_member_moderation: no
* member_moderation_action: Reject
* member_moderation_notice: The notice you want to send to people that
send mails to the list without being subscribed, this should include
instructions on how to register.
* generic_nonmember_action: Reject


from_name: Anthony DiPierro

subject: [WikiEN-l] RE: WikiEN-l Digest, Vol 23, Issue 20

body:
>Some can be tagged correctly without the original uploader:
>* fair use
>* where a suitable source is given
>* images that are obviously PD because of age
>and probably some other cases.

Well, the fair use tag can actually never be used correctly by anyone,
because fair use is a description of the use, not the image itself.

Anthony

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


subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Indian languages and grants (was Re:
	Combined	effort)

body:
Yann Forget wrote:

>>As you noted, the choice is a political one, and I'm not sure we ought
>>to be in the business of running political campaigns.  Providing
>>resources for anyone to work on a Wikipedia in any language they choose,
>>sure; but to actively promote the use of particular languages over other
>>languages isn't our place.
>>
>>
>
>Well, imposing a foreign language is a political choice, even if it is because
>this is not enough content in the local language.
>
>
I don't see how that's "imposing" anything.  As an English speaker, I
provide content in English free of charge; people may choose not to use
it if they don't like English-language encyclopedias.  If speakers of
other languages do not provide a similar amount of content, that's not
because I imposed anything on them.

Providing tools to people to do what they want with them is
non-political.  Launching a $30,000 advertising campaign to promote the
use of minority languages is overtly political, and something I would
strongly oppose.

-Mark


subject: [WikiEN-l] RE: WikiEN-l Digest

body:
>>I was thinking of another non-English semifork of Wikipedia which has
>>way more articles than the Wikipedia version, and whose owner is
>>deeply involved in Wikipedia but while bragging in private e-mails and
>>on-list about how much work he/she does compared to others to put more
>>free content online, does not consider allowing the corresponding
>>language version of Wikipedia to share content.
>
>If they are GFDL, they cannot disallow that. If they are not GFDL, they
>are using material originally from Wikipedia illegally.

The GFDL doesn't require that everything on the site must be released under
the GFDL, only derivative works.  Even Wikipiedia itself uses non-GFDL
content in its site.

Besides, even if the content is GFDLed, Wikipedia would be required to start
following the GFDL in order to use that content.  That can go from easy to
nearly impossible depending on whether or not there are invariant sections
in the text.

Anthony

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now!
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/


from_name: Elly Waterman

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Ellywa's Law

body:
"Mark Williamson" <node.ue at gmail.com> schreef
in bericht news:849f98ed05060416325458d3a3 at mail.gmail.com...
Or Pippu in Sicilian, or Roderick in Maltese, or Mountain in Chinese... ;)

Mark

Mark, you are absolutely right, there are lots and lots of great and
wonderful people on Wikipedia, men as well as women. Elly(wa)


from_name: Muke Tever

references:
<42999E86.6090106@wikia.com> <429A1CEB.9020604@telus.net>
	<429A24FE.2040307@wikia.com> <429AB67C.3080205@telus.net>
	<op.srlbcnxm2okkek@arcadia.hsd1.co.comcast.net>
	<429DA5C3.9040701@telus.net>
	<op.srpzf6wi2okkek@arcadia.hsd1.co.comcast.net>
	<429E865B.9050407@gmail.com>
	<op.srqb2p0e2okkek@arcadia.hsd1.co.comcast.net>
	<d7v89c$mcf$1@sea.gmane.org>

body:
Timwi <timwi at gmx.net> wrote:
> Muke Tever wrote:
>> I prefer that no information be given than wrong information or
>> information that has not been checked.
>
> Gosh, you must be hating Wikipedia. ;-)

Only in places.  Wikipedians are lousy etymologists, for one ;p

> And the wiki process in general.

No, I just want a more reliable Wiktionary :|

	*Muke!
--
website:     http://frath.net/
LiveJournal: http://kohath.livejournal.com/
deviantArt:  http://kohath.deviantart.com/

FrathWiki, a conlang and conculture wiki:
http://wiki.frath.net/


from_name: elwp at gmx.de

subject: [Wikitech-l] dump format

body:
Not only history blobs can benefit from splitting revision
texts into sections and sorting them. The sizes of XML exported
pages (with complete page histories) can also be reduced.

This is the current structure (only relevant tags):

<page>
  <revision><text>text0</text></revision>
  <revision><text>text1</text></revision>
</page>

This would be the new structure:

<page>

sectiontext0

sectiontext1

sectiontext2

  <revision><text type="sectionlist">0 1</text></revision>
  <revision><text type="sectionlist">0 2</text></revision>
</page>

Maybe it's not a problem for the wikimedia servers to store
50 or 100GB of badly compressed history blobs, but I guess
most people who download the dumps wish for smaller file
sizes. I'll write the code if there is consensus on such a
format.

--
Geschenkt: 3 Monate GMX ProMail gratis + 3 Ausgaben stern gratis
++ Jetzt anmelden & testen ++ http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail ++


from_name: Magnus Manske

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Automatic image tagging

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

After just working my way through 150 untagged images on en.wikipedia
(an that is only a small fraction!) I thought about ways to improve the
tagging process.

Many of the images had no image description at all. But making
descriptions mandatory would only lead to things like "asdfghjk" as a
description. Having a mandatory dropdown box with licenses would make
things even worse, as newbies/vandals/people-who-don't-care might choose
one at random, making it much harder to find copyright violations. (They
can already do that by putting a false tag in the description, but that
requires knowledge of the tagging system and something bordering on
criminal energy).

So I thought, why not, upon upload of a new image, *automatically* add
"{{unverified}}" to any image dewscription that does *not* contain the
sequence "{{"? This is dead easy technically, and will bring untagged
images to our attention without wasting time and effort of people who
could do something more constructive.

Image descriptions that contain "{{" but *not* a copyright tag can still
be found through the current scanning process.

The "{{unverified}}" could be stored in [[Mediawiki:AutoImageTag]] or
something, so each wikipedia can use the one appropriate for the
language/tagging system.

Magnus

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCoz2LCZKBJbEFcz0RAlPZAJ98JUPGIN0A/4sR7cz5NHnjYpV49ACfcdUG
oXgduceIdV1VGtGXeP8Gb8E=
=gaSi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Mark Williamson

subject:
[Wikipedia-l] Re: Indian languages and grants (was Re: Combined
	effort)

body:
Showing people how it could be benificial to create material in their
mother tongue would hardly be the sort of thing to get gongchandang
pissed off at you.

In fact, despite an existing policy of minority language education in
China, there is usually a vast shortage of materials and they often
have to use putonghua textbooks even though the kids may not know how
to read them.

Mark

On 05/06/05, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> Tim Starling wrote:
>
> >Delirium wrote:
> >
> >
> >>As you noted, the choice is a political one, and I'm not sure we ought
> >>to be in the business of running political campaigns.  Providing
> >>resources for anyone to work on a Wikipedia in any language they choose,
> >>sure; but to actively promote the use of particular languages over other
> >>languages isn't our place.
> >>
> >>
> >
> >If I understand correctly, it's not a political issue in the sense of
> >being controversial, it's a political issue in that polticians all want
> >to do something about it.
> >
> Well, it *is* a political issue in the sense of being controversial.
> What the proper arrangement of languages should be in India is quite a
> hot-button issue.  For example, to what extent should the country have a
> common language, at least as a second or third language that people can
> use to communicate with each other?  If there is to be some such
> language, should it be English or Hindi?  A previous BJP government
> tried to expand the teaching of Hindi as a second language in
> non-Hindi-speaking areas, in order to help it supplant English as the
> common-denominator language, but met with fierce resistance from
> non-Hindi-speakers.
>
> In other countries the issue is even more inflamed---consider, for
> example, the Tamil language in Sri Lanka, or the Tibetan language in
> China.  I don't really think this is a mess we should wander into.
>
> -Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>

--
SI HOC LEGERE SCIS NIMIVM ERVDITIONIS HABES
QVANTVM MATERIAE MATERIETVR MARMOTA MONAX SI MARMOTA MONAX MATERIAM
POSSIT MATERIARI
ESTNE VOLVMEN IN TOGA AN SOLVM TIBI LIBET ME VIDERE


from_name: MacGyverMagic/Mgm

body:
I couldn't agree more, Michael.

--Mgm

On 6/5/05, Michael Snow <wikipedia at earthlink.net> wrote:
> Rebecca wrote:
>
> >On 6/5/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>That's why I want to breath new life into the Mediation Committee. I
> >>think Mediation shouldn't be another step towards banning either party
> >>but a genuine effort at resolving the problem.
> >>
> >>--Mgm
> >>
> >>
> >The point is that it didn't work before, and there's been no idea of
> >how to fix the issue that ruined things before - that none of us are
> >trained mediators, and most of us simply did not have the skills to
> >bring antagonistic, warring parties together. We'd all like a
> >mediation committee that worked, but wishing doesn't necessarily make
> >it so.
> >
> >
> I don't think the problem with mediation is a lack of training or skills
> (no offense, but by and large I wouldn't call the arbitrators
> professionally trained either). Mediation can be handled by anybody with
> good sense, patience, and the ability to resist getting over-agitated by
> the emotions of the disputing parties. We actually have had quite a few
> instances of successful mediation, but many of them have happened
> outside the formal process, often handled by people who are not part of
> the Mediation Committee.
>
> However, I agree that formal mediation is not working terribly well for
> us. One of the biggest challenges for Wikipedia mediation is simply the
> fact that we're stuck in an online, text-only medium. This affects
> mediation more dramatically than the other dispute resolution processes,
> because it takes away a key element of what normally makes mediation
> successful.
>
> One of the reasons mediation works is because it brings the parties
> together, *face-to-face* and with an observer present. This brings into
> play all kinds of social inhibitions that force the parties to tone down
> their hostility and aggression. The resulting atmosphere is much more
> conducive for the mediator and the parties to work together and find a
> mutually acceptable solution.
>
> Wikipedia mediation doesn't have a feasible way to recreate these
> conditions, and I doubt that even real-time communication via IRC can
> overcome this handicap. The lowered barriers against being deliberately
> offensive and the ease of miscommunication when using text are too great
> a challenge. As a result, I think that for us mediation is more likely
> to be useful much earlier in the process, as disputes are only beginning
> and before they have really had a chance to heat up. This would require
> watching more closely for situations where mediation can help, and a
> more interventionist approach from the mediators, rather than waiting
> for cases to come to them.
>
> --Michael Snow
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>


from_name: Rebecca

subject: [WikiEN-l] Arbitration Commitee Seeking Comment

body:
On 6/5/05, MacGyverMagic/Mgm <macgyvermagic at gmail.com> wrote:
> That's why I want to breath new life into the Mediation Committee. I
> think Mediation shouldn't be another step towards banning either party
> but a genuine effort at resolving the problem.
>
> --Mgm

The point is that it didn't work before, and there's been no idea of
how to fix the issue that ruined things before - that none of us are
trained mediators, and most of us simply did not have the skills to
bring antagonistic, warring parties together. We'd all like a
mediation committee that worked, but wishing doesn't necessarily make
it so.

-- ambi


from_name: Anthere

subject: [Wikipedia-l] Re: Enciclopedia Libre

body:
Timwi a ?crit:
> Jimmy Wales wrote:
>
>>
>> [Encyclopedia Libre]
>>
>> What software version are they using?  Is there anything we can do to
>> help them?
>
>
> Assuming Enciclopedia Libre is meant, 1.3.11.
>
> Isn't this the one that was originally a fork of the Spanish Wikipedia?
> I can't remember what the reasons were for forking or for not merging
> back in. Does anyone know? Maybe we should think about encouraging a
> remerge.
>
> Timwi

The visible reason was fear of advertisment.

The less visible reason is best explained here by Brion (3 years ago) on
another issue (which could have resulted in a very similar outcome)

http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/intlwiki-l/2002-June/000451.html

I'd say it was also the type of misunderstanding which results and
escalates from lack of bonds. From not knowing the other party.

Ant


from_name: Delirium

body:
Tim Starling wrote:

>Delirium wrote:
>
>
>>As you noted, the choice is a political one, and I'm not sure we ought
>>to be in the business of running political campaigns.  Providing
>>resources for anyone to work on a Wikipedia in any language they choose,
>>sure; but to actively promote the use of particular languages over other
>>languages isn't our place.
>>
>>
>
>If I understand correctly, it's not a political issue in the sense of
>being controversial, it's a political issue in that polticians all want
>to do something about it.
>
Well, it *is* a political issue in the sense of being controversial.
What the proper arrangement of languages should be in India is quite a
hot-button issue.  For example, to what extent should the country have a
common language, at least as a second or third language that people can
use to communicate with each other?  If there is to be some such
language, should it be English or Hindi?  A previous BJP government
tried to expand the teaching of Hindi as a second language in
non-Hindi-speaking areas, in order to help it supplant English as the
common-denominator language, but met with fierce resistance from
non-Hindi-speakers.

In other countries the issue is even more inflamed---consider, for
example, the Tamil language in Sri Lanka, or the Tibetan language in
China.  I don't really think this is a mess we should wander into.

-Mark


from_name: Tony Sidaway

body:
steven l. rubenstein said:
>
> David, this is an issue I and others have raised repeatedly over the
> past  years: many irresolvable disputes center on content, and
> Wikipedia needs a  mechanism for dealing with these content-based
> disputes.

Why?  If the disputes are irresolvable, why is it necessary to bring in a
deus ex machina to declare a resolution?  Isn't it just more honest to
leave the irresolvable unresolved?  I find this, the current way, quite
satisfactory and if the arbcom really is accepting cases that are in the
realm of content disputes then they should simply be more parsimonious in
the kind of dispute they accept.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Automatic image tagging

body:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Gregory Maxwell schrieb:
> On 6/5/05, Magnus Manske <magnus.manske at web.de> wrote:
>
>>So I thought, why not, upon upload of a new image, *automatically* add
>>"{{unverified}}" to any image dewscription that does *not* contain the
>>sequence "{{"? This is dead easy technically, and will bring untagged
>>images to our attention without wasting time and effort of people who
>>could do something more constructive.
>
>
> A good idea, but I'm concerned that users will just guess a license
> when they are fixing unverified images. It is already the case that
> wikipedia has many images incorrectly tagged.
>
> Most of the time only the uploader can identify the copyright except
> in the rare case of an historically notable image that we're using as
> fair use... For other case it would take more effort to locate the
> source (if it's even possible) than to replace the image, and in many
> of the cases where the image wasn't notable but we could find it
> without the uploader the image will not be free for us to use.
>
> Because of this the unverified template need to instruct users not to
> add the license. Users should hunt down the uploader and get the
> uploader to set it. If the uploader is not available we should dump
> the image.

Some can be tagged correctly without the original uploader:
* fair use
* where a suitable source is given
* images that are obviously PD because of age
and probably some other cases.

That said, the {{unverified}} template should probably include a warning
not just to guess a license, and that doing so might have legal
consequences. After all, if I tag a copyrighted picture with, say,
{{GFDL}}, and wikipedia (or someone else using it) gets sued, they can
point to me for tagging it, right?

Magnus
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFCo09ECZKBJbEFcz0RAlq1AJ9XFHto4pnHode3tWb5EdfDUGz/0gCfdrOt
kS+Ua2Ky+ooXOthuJPgpIOg=
=NKl/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


from_name: Walter van Kalken

body:
>
>Perhaps the answer in the Indian case is with advertising, promotion and
>lobbying. We could start with a small budget in the $10-20K range, spent
>mostly on market research and promotion. Then we could use statistical
>measures of the success of that campaign to request the funding of a
>full-time administrative position and a continuation or scaling up of
>the advertising.
>
>-- Tim Starling
>
>
>
Tim Starling's proposal makes a lot of sense. I feel we should seriously
consider it. Not just for India, but Africa as well.


from_name: David Gerard

body:
MacGyverMagic/Mgm (macgyvermagic at gmail.com) [050605 17:52]:

> That's why I want to breath new life into the Mediation Committee. I
> think Mediation shouldn't be another step towards banning either party
> but a genuine effort at resolving the problem.

Mediation is good, but it's hard to make mediation into a part of a formal
process. [[WP:TINMC]] being officially unofficial is probably the right
approach, for example.

- d.


subject: [Wikipedia-l] Combined effort

body:
Mark Williamson (node.ue at gmail.com) [050605 10:25]:

> I have only had minimal success in sending out e-mails about inactive
> Wikipedias.
> But then, most of the people I e-mail, I don't know.
> I figure that if each of us knows two or three people who speak
> languages of inactive Wikipedias, and we each tell all of these people
> that we know that there is a Wikipedia in their language, the effect
> would be much greater.
> So, if you know anybody who speaks one of the following languages,
> please tell them.

> India: All major languages

All major languages of India?!

That's  ... amazing. (As well as wrong and bad.)

Free software has enough interest for organisations to form (FSF India).
Perhaps FSF India would be a good place to drop a line about this to.

- d.


body:
Mark Pellegrini (mapellegrini at comcast.net) [050605 13:36]:

> "We have talk pages and email addresses. There is the RFC process.  If
> content disputes get out of hand it's because "good" people cannot bring
> themselves to act like good people."
> This is demonstrably not true. I can see you have never dealt with the
> likes of Plautus before.

He's in the class of pathological users we now show the door in a careful
but livably efficient manner. (c.f. Irate, WikiUser.) I think the
characterisation of what happens in the sort of dispute that's a proxy for
a content issue has something to it.

- d.


body:
steven l. rubenstein (rubenste at ohiou.edu) [050605 22:48]:

> What we need first is a ruling by or concerning the ArbCom that it will
> consider and pass judgements on content-based disputes, or it will not.  We
> just need to make this clear, one way or the other.

I can tell you now we have no intention of taking on this one as well! Not
just the amount of work, but simply that that's not what the AC was put
into place for.

> And if ArbCom will not or cannot handle content-based disputes, we need to
> develop another committee or mechanism.

Well, yeah.

There are all sorts of possible problems. Specialist Point Of View is not
necessarily Neutral Point Of View. That sort of thing.

> I am repeating something I have said several times in the past.  This issue
> is not new.

That's why it's being discussed here as well :-)

- d.