Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
David Gerard wrote: I have been told this by Wikimedians who used to work in and with such institutions. Governments told them to be more businesslike, this attracted the people you describe. If there was a document originating from elected politicians, telling public *schools* to be more businesslike, that would cause public outrage, at least in Sweden. So can we find the sources where this kind of encouragement is directed towards public museums? We need document numbers and dates, to trace how the trend has spread between countries. Annual reports from some larger museums should be a good starting point. Our allies could be individual experienced museum people, archivists and librarians, who disagree with current policy. -- Lars Aronsson (l...@aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
David Gerard wrote: That's what I mean - this issue goes way beyond NPG into how arts institutions are funded and sustained, which is why the NPG or people therein may believe they're really fighting for their lives and we threaten that. And if the NPG doesn't think that, other galleries may think that. And they may be right, if their funding's really bad. The only goal worth pursuing is lobbying UK to change their copyright law. Anything else is small fry. Ciao Henning ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Ombudsman commission
On dewiki there is a discussion whether the Ombudsman commission does fulfill its mission. http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:Checkuser/Anfragen#Ombudskommission Some months ago there was a checkuser action which was questioned by some users and the Ombudsman commission was asked to investigate the case. The only dewiki member of the Ombudsman commission did recuse himself from the case. The other members can't be reached or don't comment. Regards, Peter [[User:Pjacobi]] ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
geni wrote: 2009/7/18 John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no: Sorry, I don't follow you on this one. If the existing business model don't work and it should be changed, then work with them to change it and make the alternate options viable. John We do not have the capacity to raise sufficient funds to make it a worthwhile business model. How do you know that? Yann -- http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
2009/7/18 Yann Forget y...@forget-me.net: geni wrote: 2009/7/18 John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no: Sorry, I don't follow you on this one. If the existing business model don't work and it should be changed, then work with them to change it and make the alternate options viable. We do not have the capacity to raise sufficient funds to make it a worthwhile business model. How do you know that? Not out of our pockets directly, anyway. But helping them lobby for better funding from sources other than copyright claims on public domain works is absolutely in our interest as well as theirs. If we can set up such a program, we could plausibly help do something very financially efficient in terms of what we'd put into it. We already have lots of volunteers who would be very keen to help any way they can with such programs. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
2009/7/18 Yann Forget y...@forget-me.net: geni wrote: 2009/7/18 John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no: Sorry, I don't follow you on this one. If the existing business model don't work and it should be changed, then work with them to change it and make the alternate options viable. John We do not have the capacity to raise sufficient funds to make it a worthwhile business model. How do you know that? Yann Our fund raiseing capacity is a few million $ a year. The NPG have spent over $1 million and they have one of the smaller UK collections. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
geni wrote: 2009/7/18 Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com: Put me in touch with instructors at art schools and I'll incorporate restoration into their curriculum. You'll be surprised how scaleable this is, particularly if we work out exhibition opportunities. -Durova Restoration isn't the problem for the most part. The English part of the National Monuments Record contains about 10 million items (mostly photos I think). Wales and Scotland ad few million more. That includes a fairly complete public domain aerial survey of the UK from the 1940s. We do not have the capacity to support digitalization on that scale. Well, who's your we? In the case of the NPG, it is quite clear that the cost of the digitalization is small compared with the potential benefit. There are people and organisations willing to pay to have a copy of these famous portraits. The issue is how to collect the funds without puting a copyright on the images. For this, we need a new business model. Think about how donations was raised to free up Blender.[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)#History Yann -- http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
2009/7/18 Yann Forget y...@forget-me.net: geni wrote: 2009/7/18 Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com: Put me in touch with instructors at art schools and I'll incorporate restoration into their curriculum. You'll be surprised how scaleable this is, particularly if we work out exhibition opportunities. -Durova Restoration isn't the problem for the most part. The English part of the National Monuments Record contains about 10 million items (mostly photos I think). Wales and Scotland ad few million more. That includes a fairly complete public domain aerial survey of the UK from the 1940s. We do not have the capacity to support digitalization on that scale. Well, who's your we? In the case of the NPG, it is quite clear that the cost of the digitalization is small compared with the potential benefit. There are people and organisations willing to pay to have a copy of these famous portraits. The issue is how to collect the funds without puting a copyright on the images. For this, we need a new business model. Think about how donations was raised to free up Blender.[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)#History €100,000 is not a significant amount of money when dealing with trying to digitalize the various UK archives. -- geni ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] New Larry Sanger project: WatchKnow
http://www.watchknow.org/ CC-by-sa educational videos for school kids. Currently building up a head of steam before its official big splash launch: http://blog.citizendium.org/2009/07/17/garrison-keillor-notices-my-birthday/ - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 64, Issue 51
2009/7/18 Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com: Put me in touch with instructors at art schools and I'll incorporate restoration into their curriculum. You'll be surprised how scaleable this is, particularly if we work out exhibition opportunities. -Durova Restoration isn't the problem for the most part. The English part of the National Monuments Record contains about 10 million items (mostly photos I think). Wales and Scotland ad few million more. That includes a fairly complete public domain aerial survey of the UK from the 1940s. We do not have the capacity to support digitalization on that scale. -- geni Are you talking about our capacity or their capacity? The Library of Congress has 14 million items and has been digitizing since 1994. It's an ongoing process; they've developed excellent protocols. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/about/techIn.html -Durova -- http://durova.blogspot.com/ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 10:19 AM, genigeni...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/7/18 Yann Forget y...@forget-me.net: In the case of the NPG, it is quite clear that the cost of the digitalization is small compared with the potential benefit. There are people and organisations willing to pay to have a copy of these famous portraits. The issue is how to collect the funds without puting a copyright on the images. For this, we need a new business model. Think about how donations was raised to free up Blender.[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)#History €100,000 is not a significant amount of money when dealing with trying to digitalize the various UK archives. The exact amount of money is beside the point. I think the business model analagous to Blender goes something like this: A GLAM figures out the cost per item of its digitization project. Take that, add some modest figure for subsidizing the rest of the institution's activities, and that's the price for releasing any given reproduction. Anyone may contribute all or part of the price for releasing any given work. Once the full price has been reached, the scan is made available for free to anyone. Maybe this would happen in lots, with the most popular/useful/valuable works digitized in the early lots with higher prices so that the capital investments get recouped early on. The next lot gets digitized once a certain threshold is reached with the previous one (e.g., the break-even point to finance the next lot). Maybe there are tiers for any given work:$X for 800px, $2X for 1600px, $4X for 3200px, etc. If the 1600px version is available already but you really need the 3200px version, you pay the difference of $2X and now the 3200px version is available for everyone. The advantage of this scheme is that there are several groups who would be likely to help pay for the digitization: publishers who need hi-res versions and who would previously have paid for licensing; arts lovers who would be making donations anyway (and who can now point exactly to what their donation funded); free culture advocates. And if there is some way of recognizing the donors (This portrait was digitized thanks to the donations of John Q. Wikipedian and Sally B. Artlover), it might be much more financially successful in the short to medium term than the copyright-and-license model. -Sage ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
geni wrote: 2009/7/18 Yann Forget y...@forget-me.net: In the case of the NPG, it is quite clear that the cost of the digitalization is small compared with the potential benefit. There are people and organisations willing to pay to have a copy of these famous portraits. The issue is how to collect the funds without puting a copyright on the images. For this, we need a new business model. Think about how donations was raised to free up Blender.[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)#History €100,000 is not a significant amount of money when dealing with trying to digitalize the various UK archives. Comparing the amount raised for a single (quite obscure) software with what could be raised to digitalize world-famous works of art does not make sense. Yann -- http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] National Portrait Gallery
The problem is in sustaining the less used part of the collection, which from an archival standpoint and also ultimate cultural value is equally important. Normally, any such institution would expect to use the profits from the ones that sell most to support the others--[[The long tail]]. This is analogous to the principle that it is easy to finance a library of best-sellers--any town can do it, but only the very richest organizations can afford a library that includes everything that might be needed. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 2:36 PM, Yann Forgety...@forget-me.net wrote: geni wrote: 2009/7/18 Yann Forget y...@forget-me.net: In the case of the NPG, it is quite clear that the cost of the digitalization is small compared with the potential benefit. There are people and organisations willing to pay to have a copy of these famous portraits. The issue is how to collect the funds without puting a copyright on the images. For this, we need a new business model. Think about how donations was raised to free up Blender.[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)#History €100,000 is not a significant amount of money when dealing with trying to digitalize the various UK archives. Comparing the amount raised for a single (quite obscure) software with what could be raised to digitalize world-famous works of art does not make sense. Yann -- http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net http://fr.wikisource.org/ | Bibliothèque libre http://wikilivres.info | Documents libres ___ 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] National Portrait Gallery
Forget direct funding, its not practical. The interesting thing is, we do have sales organization that is very important for GLAM-institutions, and it is probably so interesting that a conflict with us is simply to damaging. How do we turn this around to make it even more interesting for them? Imagine this, if a gallery or museum has a painting of some Leonard van der Olsen-Mozart (he don't exist, hopefully..) then this museum should make sure there is a bio for the person and of his painting of The fallen Madonna with the big bottom, and those should link back to the galleries own pages. At those pages the gallery should make available any high res copies, uv-scans, scientific works, etc, about the painting and the painter. We should be the yellow pages for the GLAM-institutions. It should be so important for them to have a presence on Wikipedia that it should raise questions from the government if they don't have a sufficient presence. Now, how do we make this possible? Forget direct funding, that is simply not interesting. Making the material available is interesting because this creates further use, not to forget visitors. John geni wrote: 2009/7/18 Yann Forget y...@forget-me.net: geni wrote: 2009/7/18 Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com: Put me in touch with instructors at art schools and I'll incorporate restoration into their curriculum. You'll be surprised how scaleable this is, particularly if we work out exhibition opportunities. -Durova Restoration isn't the problem for the most part. The English part of the National Monuments Record contains about 10 million items (mostly photos I think). Wales and Scotland ad few million more. That includes a fairly complete public domain aerial survey of the UK from the 1940s. We do not have the capacity to support digitalization on that scale. Well, who's your we? In the case of the NPG, it is quite clear that the cost of the digitalization is small compared with the potential benefit. There are people and organisations willing to pay to have a copy of these famous portraits. The issue is how to collect the funds without puting a copyright on the images. For this, we need a new business model. Think about how donations was raised to free up Blender.[1] [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)#History €100,000 is not a significant amount of money when dealing with trying to digitalize the various UK archives. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems
Seems like a very useful service. Would the Foundation be interesting in taking ownership of this URL? If so, would Blad be willing to give/sell it to them? If so, could it be incorporated into a sidebar link similar to permanent link? - John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no wrote: From: John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, 17 July, 2009 20:38:09 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems This is a wikipedian from Norway. John Erling Blad Wikimedia Norway Chad wrote: On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Chad wrote: Does anyone know the guy who owns enwp.org? That being said, enwp.org/?oldid=1234 does work :) -Chad (Asked whois.pir.org:43 about enwp.org) Domain ID: D148943548-LROR Domain Name: ENWP.ORG Created On: 23-Aug-2007 14: 33: 18 UTC Last Updated On: 21-Sep-2008 00: 28: 40 UTC Expiration Date: 23-Aug-2009 14: 33: 18 UTC Sponsoring Registrar: ASCIO Technologies Inc. - Denmark (R76-LROR) Status: OK Registrant ID: AT9622172-051 Registrant Name: Thomas Kjoerberg Registrant Street1: Groennevollen 14 Registrant Street2: Registrant Street3: Registrant City: Bergen Registrant State/Province: -- Registrant Postal Code: 5016 Registrant Country: NO Registrant Phone: 47.99298989 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email: tl-lo...@hotmail.com Admin ID: AT4607819-051 Admin Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Admin Organization: One.com A/S Admin Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Admin Street2: Admin Street3: Admin City: Copenhagen V Admin State/Province: Admin Postal Code: 1560 Admin Country: DK Admin Phone: 45.46907100 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: 45.70205872 Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Tech ID: AT9622194-051 Tech Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Tech Organization: One.com A/S Tech Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Tech Street2: Tech Street3: Tech City: Copenhagen V Tech State/Province: Tech Postal Code: 1560 Tech Country: DK Tech Phone: 45.46907100 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX: 45.70205872 Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Name Server: NS1.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS2.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS3.B-ONE.NU Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org 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 I did the whois too, but I don't know him. I was asking if (in general) we know the guy who runs it :) -Chad ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems
Sorry I misunderstood! Great to hear WM-NO is following up. - John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no wrote: From: John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, 19 July, 2009 00:26:28 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems The domain is not mine, nor does it belong to Wikimedia Norway, it is another wikipedian from Norway who owns the domain. Wikimedia Norway has been in contact with him about the domain and the future use of the service, and another wikipedian has also made inquiries. John Erling Blad Wikimedia Norway Andrew Turvey wrote: Seems like a very useful service. Would the Foundation be interesting in taking ownership of this URL? If so, would Blad be willing to give/sell it to them? If so, could it be incorporated into a sidebar link similar to permanent link? - John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no wrote: From: John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, 17 July, 2009 20:38:09 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems This is a wikipedian from Norway. John Erling Blad Wikimedia Norway Chad wrote: On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Chad wrote: Does anyone know the guy who owns enwp.org? That being said, enwp.org/?oldid=1234 does work :) -Chad (Asked whois.pir.org:43 about enwp.org) Domain ID: D148943548-LROR Domain Name: ENWP.ORG Created On: 23-Aug-2007 14: 33: 18 UTC Last Updated On: 21-Sep-2008 00: 28: 40 UTC Expiration Date: 23-Aug-2009 14: 33: 18 UTC Sponsoring Registrar: ASCIO Technologies Inc. - Denmark (R76-LROR) Status: OK Registrant ID: AT9622172-051 Registrant Name: Thomas Kjoerberg Registrant Street1: Groennevollen 14 Registrant Street2: Registrant Street3: Registrant City: Bergen Registrant State/Province: -- Registrant Postal Code: 5016 Registrant Country: NO Registrant Phone: 47.99298989 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email: tl-lo...@hotmail.com Admin ID: AT4607819-051 Admin Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Admin Organization: One.com A/S Admin Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Admin Street2: Admin Street3: Admin City: Copenhagen V Admin State/Province: Admin Postal Code: 1560 Admin Country: DK Admin Phone: 45.46907100 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: 45.70205872 Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Tech ID: AT9622194-051 Tech Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Tech Organization: One.com A/S Tech Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Tech Street2: Tech Street3: Tech City: Copenhagen V Tech State/Province: Tech Postal Code: 1560 Tech Country: DK Tech Phone: 45.46907100 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX: 45.70205872 Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Name Server: NS1.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS2.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS3.B-ONE.NU Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org 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 I did the whois too, but I don't know him. I was asking if (in general) we know the guy who runs it :) -Chad ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe:
Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems
The domain is not mine, nor does it belong to Wikimedia Norway, it is another wikipedian from Norway who owns the domain. Wikimedia Norway has been in contact with him about the domain and the future use of the service, and another wikipedian has also made inquiries. John Erling Blad Wikimedia Norway Andrew Turvey wrote: Seems like a very useful service. Would the Foundation be interesting in taking ownership of this URL? If so, would Blad be willing to give/sell it to them? If so, could it be incorporated into a sidebar link similar to permanent link? - John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no wrote: From: John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, 17 July, 2009 20:38:09 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems This is a wikipedian from Norway. John Erling Blad Wikimedia Norway Chad wrote: On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Chad wrote: Does anyone know the guy who owns enwp.org? That being said, enwp.org/?oldid=1234 does work :) -Chad (Asked whois.pir.org:43 about enwp.org) Domain ID: D148943548-LROR Domain Name: ENWP.ORG Created On: 23-Aug-2007 14: 33: 18 UTC Last Updated On: 21-Sep-2008 00: 28: 40 UTC Expiration Date: 23-Aug-2009 14: 33: 18 UTC Sponsoring Registrar: ASCIO Technologies Inc. - Denmark (R76-LROR) Status: OK Registrant ID: AT9622172-051 Registrant Name: Thomas Kjoerberg Registrant Street1: Groennevollen 14 Registrant Street2: Registrant Street3: Registrant City: Bergen Registrant State/Province: -- Registrant Postal Code: 5016 Registrant Country: NO Registrant Phone: 47.99298989 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email: tl-lo...@hotmail.com Admin ID: AT4607819-051 Admin Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Admin Organization: One.com A/S Admin Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Admin Street2: Admin Street3: Admin City: Copenhagen V Admin State/Province: Admin Postal Code: 1560 Admin Country: DK Admin Phone: 45.46907100 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: 45.70205872 Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Tech ID: AT9622194-051 Tech Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Tech Organization: One.com A/S Tech Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Tech Street2: Tech Street3: Tech City: Copenhagen V Tech State/Province: Tech Postal Code: 1560 Tech Country: DK Tech Phone: 45.46907100 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX: 45.70205872 Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Name Server: NS1.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS2.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS3.B-ONE.NU Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org 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 I did the whois too, but I don't know him. I was asking if (in general) we know the guy who runs it :) -Chad ___ 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 ___ 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] foundation-l Digest, Vol 64, Issue 51
Digitizing isn't really that hard. You take a scanner, upload an image, label it, repeat. From: Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 9:28:28 AM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 64, Issue 51 2009/7/18 Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com: Put me in touch with instructors at art schools and I'll incorporate restoration into their curriculum. You'll be surprised how scaleable this is, particularly if we work out exhibition opportunities. -Durova Restoration isn't the problem for the most part. The English part of the National Monuments Record contains about 10 million items (mostly photos I think). Wales and Scotland ad few million more. That includes a fairly complete public domain aerial survey of the UK from the 1940s. We do not have the capacity to support digitalization on that scale. -- geni Are you talking about our capacity or their capacity? The Library of Congress has 14 million items and has been digitizing since 1994. It's an ongoing process; they've developed excellent protocols. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/about/techIn.html -Durova -- http://durova.blogspot.com/ ___ 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] foundation-l Digest, Vol 64, Issue 51
Hoi, I have had the pleasure of getting a tour at the Bibliotheka Alexandrina. It was impressive and it certainly is not that simple. Certainly not when you want to have a high quality high volume protocol. Thanks, GerardM 2009/7/19 Geoffrey Plourde geo.p...@yahoo.com Digitizing isn't really that hard. You take a scanner, upload an image, label it, repeat. From: Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 9:28:28 AM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 64, Issue 51 2009/7/18 Durova nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com: Put me in touch with instructors at art schools and I'll incorporate restoration into their curriculum. You'll be surprised how scaleable this is, particularly if we work out exhibition opportunities. -Durova Restoration isn't the problem for the most part. The English part of the National Monuments Record contains about 10 million items (mostly photos I think). Wales and Scotland ad few million more. That includes a fairly complete public domain aerial survey of the UK from the 1940s. We do not have the capacity to support digitalization on that scale. -- geni Are you talking about our capacity or their capacity? The Library of Congress has 14 million items and has been digitizing since 1994. It's an ongoing process; they've developed excellent protocols. http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/about/techIn.html -Durova -- http://durova.blogspot.com/ ___ 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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Fwd: linux.conf.au Call for Papers are now open
Hi all, I would not normally forward an open source conference CFP to this list, but I think this case has particular merit. The linux.conf.au 2010 Call for Papers closes this Friday. LCA is a free software technical conference, but one of the topics they are targeting this year is Free Software and Free Culture topics, including licencing and Free and Open approaches outside software. Also, the first announced keynote speaker is Benjamin Mako Hill, who is on the WMF's advisory board. It's a really enjoyable full-on technical community conference, so if a trip to the southern hemisphere in January sounds OK by you please think about submitting a proposal. (see Information for speakers http://www.lca2010.org.nz/programme/papers_info to find out about benefits for speakers) It's on during January 18-23 2010 in Wellington, NZ. I am going to try and organise a meet-up the weekend before the conference. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Wellington cheers, Brianna -- Forwarded message -- From: Michael Davies mich...@the-davies.net Date: 2009/6/29 Subject: [lca10-papers] linux.conf.au Call for Papers are now open! To: linux SA list linu...@linuxsa.org.au -- Forwarded message -- From: linux.conf.au Announcements lca-annou...@lists.linux.org.au Date: 2009/6/29 Subject: [lca-announce] linux.conf.au Call for Papers are now open! To: lca-annou...@lists.linux.org.au === linux.conf.au Call For Papers === linux.conf.au ( http://www.lca2010.org.nz ) is pleased to announce the opening of its Call for Papers for the coming linux.conf.au, LCA2010! LCA2010 will be held from Monday 18 January 2010 to Saturday 23 January 2010 in Wellington, New Zealand. linux.conf.au isn't just a Linux conference. It is a technical conference about Free and Open Source Software, held annually in Australasia since 2001 - covering everything from the Linux Kernel and the BSDs to OpenOffice.org, from networking to audio-visual magic, from hardware hacks to Creative Commons. === Important Dates === Call for Papers opens: Monday 29 June 2009 Call for Papers closes: Friday 24 July 2009 Email Notifications from Papers Committee: Early September 2009 Registrations open: Mid September 2009 Conference Dates: Monday 18 January to Saturday 23 January 2001 === Information on Papers === The LCA2010 Papers Committee is looking for a broad range of papers spanning everything from programming and software to desktop and userspace to community, government and education but there is one essential: The core of your paper must relate to open source in some way, i.e., if it's a paper about software then the software has to be licensed under an Open Source license. The LCA2010 Papers Committee welcome proposals for Papers on the following topics: * Kernel and system topics such as filesystems and embedded devices * Networking topics such as peer to peer networking, or tuning a TCP/IP stack * Desktop topics such as office and productivity applications, mobile devices, peripherals, crypto security and viruses and other malware * Server topics such as clusters and other supercomputers, databases and grid computing * Systems administration topics such as maintaining large numbers of machines and disaster recovery * Programming topics such as software engineering practices and test driven development * Free Software and Free Culture topics, including licencing and Free and Open approaches outside software * Free Software usage topics, including home, IT, education, manufacturing, research and government usage. Most presentations and tutorials will be technical in nature, but proposals for presentations on other aspects of Free Software and Free Culture, such as educational and cultural aspects are welcome. LCA2010 is pleased to invite proposals for three types of papers: * Presentation - 45 minutes * Tutorials - 1 hour and 45 minutes (short) * Tutorials - 3 hours and 30 minutes (long) Presentations are 45 minute slots (including questions) that are typically a one-way lecture from you to the audience - the typical conference presentation. These form the bulk of the available conference slots. Tutorials are either 1 hour and 45 minutes, or 3 hours and 30 minutes in length, and work best when they are interactive or hands-on in nature. Tutorials are expected to have a specific learning outcome for attendees. To increase the number of people that can view your talk, LCA2010 may video the talks and make them publicly available after LCA2010. When submitting your proposal you will be asked whether materials relating to your paper can be released under a Creative Commons ShareALike License. For more information, see: http://www.lca2010.org.nz/programme/papers_info === About linux.conf.au === linux.conf.au is one of the world's best conferences for free and open source software! The coming linux.conf.au, LCA2010, will be
