Hoi, What I am missing is that Iran has blocked the whole Wikimedia domain as Commons is included in that domain. I understand that the reason is there being too much sexual explicit content. As a consequence this important free resource is no longer available to the students of Iran as a resource for illustrations for their project work.
What I would like to know is if we have been talking to Iranian politicians and / or if we have an understanding of what it takes to ensure that Commons becomes available again. Thanks, GerardM On 9 May 2010 23:28, Sue Gardner <sgard...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > Hi folks, > > I'm aiming to stay on top of this whole conversation -- which is not > easy: there is an awful lot of text being generated :-) > > So for myself and others --including new board members who may not be > super-fluent in terms of following where and how we discuss things--, > I'm going to recap here where I think the main strands of conversation > are happening. Please let me know if I'm missing anything important. > > 1) There has been a very active strand about Jimmy's actions over the > past week and his scope of authority, which I think is now resolving. > That's mostly happened here and on meta. > > 2) There is a strand about a proposed new Commons policy covering > sexual content: what is in scope, how to categorize and describe, etc. > This policy has been discussed over time, and is being actively > discussed right now. It is not yet agreed to, nor enforced. I gather > it (the policy) reaffirms that sexual imagery needs to have some > educational/informational value to warrant inclusion in Commons, > attempts to articulate more clearly than in the past what is out of > scope for the project and why, and overall, represents a tightening-up > of existing standards rather than a radical change to them. It's here: > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sexual_content > > 3) There is a strand about content filtering (and, I suppose, other > initiatives we might undertake, in addition to new/tighter policy at > Commons). This discussion is happening mostly here on foundation-l, > where it was started by Derk-Jan Hartman with the thread title > [Foundation-l] Potential ICRA labels for Wikipedia. AFAIK it's not > taking place on-wiki anywhere. > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/195663 > > I also think that if people skipped over Greg Maxwell's thread > [Foundation-l] Appropriate surprise (Commons stuff) -- it might be > worth them going back and taking a look at it. I'm not expressing an > opinion on Greg's views as laid out in that note, and I think the > focus of the conversation has moved on a little in the 12 hours or so > since he wrote it. But it's still IMO a very useful recap/summary of > where we're at, and as such I think definitely worth reading. Few of > us seem to gravitate towards recapping/summarizing/synthesizing, which > is probably too bad: it's a very useful skill in conversations like > this one, and a service to everyone involved :-) > http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/foundation/195598. > > Let me know if I'm missing anything important. > > Thanks, > Sue > > > > -- > Sue Gardner > Executive Director > Wikimedia Foundation > > 415 839 6885 office > > Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in > the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! > > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l