[Foundation-l] new project proposal wikipol
A Wikipol is an political program. It is a collection of wiki-pages that describe the actual stands of (webbased) political parties. The members of the e-party can develop and update these wiki-pages by amendments. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipol Jos Janssen ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] BBC News on BLP vandalism
2009/3/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: Politicians get quite annoyed at this stuff. In my experience they mostly take a certain level of rubbish in their stride, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work to improve the situation. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7921985.stm This article has now been posted by three different people to three different mailing lists! The thread on wikien-l is the longest - I suggest people discuss it there. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] BBC News on BLP vandalism
Hoi, When the English Wikipedia is the only Wikipedia with BLP issues, I completely agree. Thanks, GerardM 2009/3/6 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com 2009/3/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: Politicians get quite annoyed at this stuff. In my experience they mostly take a certain level of rubbish in their stride, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't work to improve the situation. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7921985.stm This article has now been posted by three different people to three different mailing lists! The thread on wikien-l is the longest - I suggest people discuss it there. ___ 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
Re: [Foundation-l] BBC News on BLP vandalism
2009/3/6 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi, When the English Wikipedia is the only Wikipedia with BLP issues, I completely agree. It's the only Wikipedia where BLP issues significantly affect UK politicians, which are the subject of the article. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] BBC News on BLP vandalism
2009/3/6 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/3/6 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: When the English Wikipedia is the only Wikipedia with BLP issues, I completely agree. It's the only Wikipedia where BLP issues significantly affect UK politicians, which are the subject of the article. Note that en:wp is more British than might be expected - according to a 2007 statistics run (by Greg Maxwell?), 50% of edits on en:wp are from the US and 25% are from the UK, even though the population ratio is 5:1. So UK residents edit 2.5x as much as US residents per capita. (I use this stat to correct UK journalists who think of Wikipedia as an American thing.) - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] BBC News on BLP vandalism
2009/3/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: 2009/3/6 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/3/6 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: When the English Wikipedia is the only Wikipedia with BLP issues, I completely agree. It's the only Wikipedia where BLP issues significantly affect UK politicians, which are the subject of the article. Note that en:wp is more British than might be expected - according to a 2007 statistics run (by Greg Maxwell?), 50% of edits on en:wp are from the US and 25% are from the UK, even though the population ratio is 5:1. So UK residents edit 2.5x as much as US residents per capita. (I use this stat to correct UK journalists who think of Wikipedia as an American thing.) That's interesting. We should try and get some more up-to-date stats on that - it would be useful for Wikimedia UK to have stats like that to throw around in negotiations, etc., to show how important we are. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] BBC News on BLP vandalism
Thomas Dalton wrote: 2009/3/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: 2009/3/6 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/3/6 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: When the English Wikipedia is the only Wikipedia with BLP issues, I completely agree. It's the only Wikipedia where BLP issues significantly affect UK politicians, which are the subject of the article. Note that en:wp is more British than might be expected - according to a 2007 statistics run (by Greg Maxwell?), 50% of edits on en:wp are from the US and 25% are from the UK, even though the population ratio is 5:1. So UK residents edit 2.5x as much as US residents per capita. (I use this stat to correct UK journalists who think of Wikipedia as an American thing.) That's interesting. We should try and get some more up-to-date stats on that - it would be useful for Wikimedia UK to have stats like that to throw around in negotiations, etc., to show how important we are. For that matter, just look at the contributors to this list alone :-) Cary ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] BBC News on BLP vandalism
2009/3/6 Cary Bass c...@wikimedia.org: That's interesting. We should try and get some more up-to-date stats on that - it would be useful for Wikimedia UK to have stats like that to throw around in negotiations, etc., to show how important we are. For that matter, just look at the contributors to this list alone :-) Yes, I've noticed a disproportionate number of Brits on this list, but I'm not sure foundation-l is representative of the community as a whole! ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Academic article review
Pharos wrote: My experience has been that, although certainly there is room for expansion in scientific articles on specialty topics, Wikipedia already has much better coverage of science than any print encyclopedias, and most basic scientific subjects are treated fairly completely. In contrast, Wikipedia's coverage of the humanities is often inferior to the better print encyclopedias, and even with very basic subjects. This is perhaps because the humanities lend themselves less to easy summary, as there is usually a great variety of scholarly opinion on basic subjects, unlike in science. I don't think that's actually true. I think some areas, like evolution that you mentioned, are covered reasonably well, because there are enough Wikipedians who have an interest in and reasonably decent knowledge of the field to write a good article, and perhaps more importantly to fend off non-good contributions or edits to the article. In many areas of science this is not true. Oddly for a computer encyclopedia, our computer science articles are largely quite poor, except in pop computing types of articles like discussions of the Linux kernel or tech companies, which are decent. My personal area of professional expertise is artificial intelligence, and our articles on *that* subject are so bad that I'm embarrassed to try to introduce academics in my field to Wikipedia, since I know they'll probably look those articles up first and be turned off by the AI-kookiness that pervades them. I think if the humanities on average are worse than the sciences on average, it's mostly down to who we have as contributors versus don't. Of course, complex fields with a variety of scholarly opinion are harder to cover, but we cover them fairly well where we have a lot of dedicated contributors with detailed knowledge of all those opinions, and badly in areas where we don't, or where they're outnumbered by people who don't really know what they're talking about. -Mark ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
