Re: [Foundation-l] breaking English Wikipedia apart
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 12:39 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.netwrote: Even now, if you show up on some projects, create a new category, write a few new articles, you have to claw your way through nominations for deletion and a blizzard of nonsense from regulars, based on being new. Not that I can't do it, but it is just wasted energy. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l The great point that Fred makes is that while we make these discussions en.wp specific, the issue of attracting new users is entirely dependent on the environment of every single wiki. -- ~Keegan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] multilingual mailing list
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 04:37:22 +0100, dex2...@pc.dk wrote: Fra: Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com Til: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Dato: Tir, 15. mar 2011 04:19 Emne: Re: [Foundation-l] multilingual mailing list 2011/3/14 Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org [mailto:lodew...@effeietsanders.org]: Het enige lastige van meertalige lijsten is dat spelfouten ineens veel grotere consequenties hebben. If Google Translator has given the right sentence structure, this sentence is not so structurally complex. However, translation is not guessable. May you word your sentence in some other way? (Translation is: The only tricky multilingual spelling lists is that suddenly many greater consequences. ) * * * My guess based on a certain knowledge of European language would be, that spelfoutens means spelling faults. They are inded an additional problem for machine translators :-) Regards, Sir48/Thyge This is correct, the sentence roughly translates as the only problem of multi-lingual lists is that typos suddenly (can) have much more serious consequences. Cheers Yaroslav ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] multilingual mailing list
Hi Milos, thanks for your attempt - it is appreciated :) I think you grasped it well, and I can imagine that a native Serbian speaker has more trouble with Dutch than a native English speaker. But yeah, probably neither of you would be able to understand it fully. My last sentence was referring to the fact that spelling mistakes suddenly have much larger consequence when you are using translation devices. There is no did you mean option, the word will just remain untranslated. It was no important remark, but rather a short comment and actually useful when you *don't* want others to understand you ;-) Lodewijk 2011/3/15 dex2...@pc.dk: Fra: Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com Til: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Dato: Tir, 15. mar 2011 04:19 Emne: Re: [Foundation-l] multilingual mailing list 2011/3/14 Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org [mailto:lodew...@effeietsanders.org]: Het enige lastige van meertalige lijsten is dat spelfouten ineens veel grotere consequenties hebben. If Google Translator has given the right sentence structure, this sentence is not so structurally complex. However, translation is not guessable. May you word your sentence in some other way? (Translation is: The only tricky multilingual spelling lists is that suddenly many greater consequences. ) * * * My guess based on a certain knowledge of European language would be, that spelfoutens means spelling faults. They are inded an additional problem for machine translators :-) Regards, Sir48/Thyge ___ 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] breaking English Wikipedia apart
On 03/14/11 5:41 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: So that would mean exporting all BLPs to a completely separate project, like Commons, which hosts and edits these BLPs, which are then available as read- only pages in Wikipedia. The existing BLPs in Wikipedia would be deleted, and any BLPs created in Wikipedia would be instantly deleted, or moved to the other project if they show promise. Taking that one step further, when the subject of one of these biographies dies the article would need to move back; the proper article history would also need to move. Moves would also involve making sure that a lot of links are repaired. Ec ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] breaking English Wikipedia apart
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 2:26 AM, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: On 03/14/11 5:41 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: So that would mean exporting all BLPs to a completely separate project, like Commons, which hosts and edits these BLPs, which are then available as read- only pages in Wikipedia. The existing BLPs in Wikipedia would be deleted, and any BLPs created in Wikipedia would be instantly deleted, or moved to the other project if they show promise. Taking that one step further, when the subject of one of these biographies dies the article would need to move back; the proper article history would also need to move. Moves would also involve making sure that a lot of links are repaired. Ec ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l That reiterates my point: BLP policy /does not only apply to the deceased/. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP#Deceased -- ~Keegan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] breaking English Wikipedia apart
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 2:31 AM, Keegan Peterzell keegan.w...@gmail.comwrote: That reiterates my point: BLP policy /does not only apply to the deceased/. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BLP#Deceased -- ~Keegan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan *recently* deceased. -- ~Keegan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Keegan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] breaking English Wikipedia apart
Nobody has suggested putting WikiProjects in charge of anything. What is suggested is that they could be beneficially used as a more immediate point of contact for newcomers, where people can get to know other editors working on the same topic areas, and also on a cross-wiki level as a means of better cross-wiki collaboration and flow of knowledge and support. FT2 On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 5:09 AM, brock.wel...@gmail.com brock.wel...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with helping wikiprojects collaborate but couldn't disagree more with making them more powerful or in charge of certain wikis. (snip) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] breaking English Wikipedia apart
--- On Tue, 15/3/11, Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net wrote: From: Ray Saintonge sainto...@telus.net On 03/14/11 5:41 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: So that would mean exporting all BLPs to a completely separate project, like Commons, which hosts and edits these BLPs, which are then available as read- only pages in Wikipedia. The existing BLPs in Wikipedia would be deleted, and any BLPs created in Wikipedia would be instantly deleted, or moved to the other project if they show promise. Taking that one step further, when the subject of one of these biographies dies the article would need to move back; the proper article history would also need to move. Moves would also involve making sure that a lot of links are repaired. That sounds complicated. A user right for BLP editing in Wikipedia would not have these drawbacks. As long as an article is in the living persons category, editors would need the BLP user right to edit it; once the article is no longer in the category, it would become open to any and all editors again. Incidentally, having the BLP user right would also be a reflection on the editor's work, and a content-based badge to strive for that is separate from adminship. And something that editors would be loath to lose. It is not a perfect solution because, as others have pointed out, BLP- sensitive material is not just contained in BLPs. However, the majority of BLP problems that subjects are justifiably aggrieved about do occur in their actual biographies. The fact that we cannot implement a perfect solution does not mean we should not implement a solution that would help address a majority of the problems and would help foster a culture of responsibility. So, how about it? Andreas ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
2011/3/15 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com I've been involved with open access journals as a professional activity from the start of the movement, long before I joined Wikipedia. There has been only limited success. Though there are almost ten thousand open access journals, 95% of them are either very small or very unimportant, and in almost all fields of study, none or almost none of the important journals are open access: This is my experience too; thanks for pointing it out. I also think this is true, but I wonder how much the current, established process of scholarship is driving high quality articles towards closed access: as I said before, OA is mainly librarian-driven, because researchers and professors are much more worried about their career and tenure (it's no judgement, just a statement), so they struggle to publish in high quality journals. I think it is very difficult to change the whole environment of scholarship, and just pointing out the virtue of being open is not enough if not supported by real benefits regarding tenure and career. I personally believe that the Wikimedia movement should ally with OA movement (i just don't know how ;-), also tho change this situation. Open access to reasearch and science is open access to culture and knowledge, we perfectly match. Aubrey ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
Though there are almost ten thousand open access journals, 95% of them are either very small or very unimportant, and in almost all fields of study, none or almost none of the important journals are open access: This is my experience too; thanks for pointing it out. I also think this is true, but I wonder how much the current, established process of scholarship is driving high quality articles towards closed access: as I said before, OA is mainly librarian-driven, because researchers and professors are much more worried about their career and tenure (it's no judgement, just a statement), so they struggle to publish in high quality journals. I think it is very difficult to change the whole environment of scholarship, and just pointing out the virtue of being open is not enough if not supported by real benefits regarding tenure and career. I personally believe that the Wikimedia movement should ally with OA movement (i just don't know how ;-), also tho change this situation. Open access to reasearch and science is open access to culture and knowledge, we perfectly match. I publish on a regular basis in top journals in physics, and there is only one OA journal of any value I know of: this is New Journal of Physics (published by IOP). It charges publication fees from the authors rather than from the readers, and has a reasonably good quality, at least special issues. Basically switching the scientific community to OA journals is equivalent from raising a number of new journals from scratch, and in my experience is unlikely. The only thing which potentially can occur is cross-field research, where new journals are likely to appear and for whatever reason they can be OA, but so far traditional journals like e.g. Nature responded by far more successfully to these cross-field changes. I personally do not see here any perspective, unless existing journals for whatever reason (which will have nothing to do with WMF) will switch to OA themselves. Cheers Yaroslav ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 06:32, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote: Could someone from the Foundation please respond to the idea of contacting universities and content database providers and inviting them to support Wikipedia by making a certain number of log-in IDs available, with the benefit -- to them -- that increased citation of high-quality publications would potentially make these publications visible to a larger audience? Is this something the Foundation would consider pursuing? Credo offered 100 accounts last year as a charitable donation. Unfortunately they were given out on a first-come, first-served basis, which meant editors who don't contribute content signed up for them, as did those who already have access at home through their local libraries -- though in fairness several withdrew their names once they realized that. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CREDO It would be wonderful if the Foundation could seek more of the same kind of donation, particularly from databases giving access to academic journals (e.g. JSTOR), but being careful to make sure the accounts went to editors who would use them the most, but who don't currently have access. This kind of thing would really improve article quality, and would make established editors feel their needs were being looked after. Sarah ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
In connection with the Credo subscriptions Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation created the mailing list Wikimediareference-l list run by erik at wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediareference-l It has a little bit of discussion from March to July, 2010. Let's all subscribe and bury this conversation away from public view so we won't have to think about it any more. I see they have a job description for a communications staff person to coordinate discussions. This is a good example of what some way of coordinating discussions is needed. One thought though, there should be some mechanism for the donor to get feedback on the use and usefulness of their donation by active and successful Wikipedia editors if they are going to be satisfied that their donation was useful and appreciated. Fred On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 06:32, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote: Could someone from the Foundation please respond to the idea of contacting universities and content database providers and inviting them to support Wikipedia by making a certain number of log-in IDs available, with the benefit -- to them -- that increased citation of high-quality publications would potentially make these publications visible to a larger audience? Is this something the Foundation would consider pursuing? Credo offered 100 accounts last year as a charitable donation. Unfortunately they were given out on a first-come, first-served basis, which meant editors who don't contribute content signed up for them, as did those who already have access at home through their local libraries -- though in fairness several withdrew their names once they realized that. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CREDO It would be wonderful if the Foundation could seek more of the same kind of donation, particularly from databases giving access to academic journals (e.g. JSTOR), but being careful to make sure the accounts went to editors who would use them the most, but who don't currently have access. This kind of thing would really improve article quality, and would make established editors feel their needs were being looked after. Sarah ___ 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] multilingual mailing list
There are at least one multilingual mailing list: Iberocoophttps://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/meta/wiki/Iberocoopmailing list[1], when people can write in Portuguese, Spanish or Italian. [1]: https://listas.wikimedia.org.ar/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/iberocoop _ *Béria Lima* http://wikimedia.pt/ (351) 925 171 484 *Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. É isso o que estamos a fazer.*** 2011/3/15 Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org Hi Milos, thanks for your attempt - it is appreciated :) I think you grasped it well, and I can imagine that a native Serbian speaker has more trouble with Dutch than a native English speaker. But yeah, probably neither of you would be able to understand it fully. My last sentence was referring to the fact that spelling mistakes suddenly have much larger consequence when you are using translation devices. There is no did you mean option, the word will just remain untranslated. It was no important remark, but rather a short comment and actually useful when you *don't* want others to understand you ;-) Lodewijk 2011/3/15 dex2...@pc.dk: Fra: Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com Til: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Dato: Tir, 15. mar 2011 04:19 Emne: Re: [Foundation-l] multilingual mailing list 2011/3/14 Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org [mailto: lodew...@effeietsanders.org]: Het enige lastige van meertalige lijsten is dat spelfouten ineens veel grotere consequenties hebben. If Google Translator has given the right sentence structure, this sentence is not so structurally complex. However, translation is not guessable. May you word your sentence in some other way? (Translation is: The only tricky multilingual spelling lists is that suddenly many greater consequences. ) * * * My guess based on a certain knowledge of European language would be, that spelfoutens means spelling faults. They are inded an additional problem for machine translators :-) Regards, Sir48/Thyge ___ 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] Is there a good reason to delete the Burj Al Arab?
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: When I said can I was talking from a legal perspective. The law is the same regardless of what language the content is in. This is not correct, please read http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy Quoting: Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP) A project-specific policy, in accordance with United States law and the law of countries where the project content is predominantly accessed (if any), that recognizes the limitations of copyright law (including case law) as applicable to the project, and permits the upload of copyrighted materials that can be legally used in the context of the project, regardless of their licensing status. Examples include: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content and http://pl.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Dozwolony_u%C5%BCytek. Cruccone ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Is there a good reason to delete the Burj Al Arab?
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Marco Chiesa chiesa.ma...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:14 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: When I said can I was talking from a legal perspective. The law is the same regardless of what language the content is in. This is not correct, please read http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Licensing_policy Quoting: Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP) A project-specific policy, in accordance with United States law and the law of countries where the project content is predominantly accessed (if any), that recognizes the limitations of copyright law (including case law) as applicable to the project, and permits the upload of copyrighted materials that can be legally used in the context of the project, regardless of their licensing status. Examples include: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Non-free_content and http://pl.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews:Dozwolony_u%C5%BCytek. Cruccone I think this is a complicated subject, but it seems to be generally accurate to say that fair use for the Wikimedia Foundation is the same regardless of the language, in the United States (where the corporation is registered). Of course that doesn't mean the WMF can't be sued, in the United States or elsewhere, but I think Thomas was answering the question of in the original post (why should we delete these images): it protects uploaders and reusers from content that is not freely licensed. Nathan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 06:32, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote: Could someone from the Foundation please respond to the idea of contacting universities and content database providers and inviting them to support Wikipedia by making a certain number of log-in IDs available, with the benefit -- to them -- that increased citation of high-quality publications would potentially make these publications visible to a larger audience? On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 07:38, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: In connection with the Credo subscriptions Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation created the mailing list Wikimediareference-l list run by erik at wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediareference-l It has a little bit of discussion from March to July, 2010. Let's all subscribe and bury this conversation away from public view so we won't have to think about it any more. I think this is a good topic for this list, Fred, because we're hoping the Foundation will consider reaching out for more of these donations. Sarah ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 06:32, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote: Could someone from the Foundation please respond to the idea of contacting universities and content database providers and inviting them to support Wikipedia by making a certain number of log-in IDs available, with the benefit -- to them -- that increased citation of high-quality publications would potentially make these publications visible to a larger audience? On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 07:38, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote: In connection with the Credo subscriptions Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation created the mailing list Wikimediareference-l list run by erik at wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediareference-l Speaking of the CREDO accounts, several people have asked that their accounts be reassigned, but they don't know how to do it. Could Erik advise? See here -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Credo_accounts#I_gave_up_my_account_in_June Sarah ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Job openings - Bugmeister
Hi there, what about this job opening? Has it been filled already? Greetings, Jan Kucera (Kozuch) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
Universities can't do this, generally. All contracts I have ever seen limit the off-campus access to people connected with the university. A few publishers even limit the on-campus access similarly, but most publishers explicitly permit it. But many universities do even worse than the contracts say: they limit on-campus access in such a way as to not permit access to visitors. This is true even of some public universities. Various excuses are offerred, none of them valid--the usual one is lack of computer facilities, which lost its credibility a number of years ago. On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:32 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com wrote: --- On Tue, 15/3/11, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote: From: David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com I've been involved with open access journals as a professional activity from the start of the movement, long before I joined Wikipedia. There has been only limited success. Though there are almost ten thousand open access journals, 95% of them are either very small or very unimportant, and in almost all fields of study, none or almost none of the important journals are open access: This is my experience too; thanks for pointing it out. No important journals at all in chemistry are open access, Almost none in physics Almost none in geology Almost none in ecology evolution A few in molecular cell biology A few only in biomedical sciences None in psychology Almost none in the social sciences or the humanities Almost none in engineering and applied science A few in medicine snip At this point, there is no academic field of study whatsoever where an adequate article could be written using only open access material. This is of course a very limiting thing for access to information not just for us, but for the world in general, and the WMF projects should certainly cooperate as closely as possible with the forces working for open access, but the suggestion that it is possible to limit to or even prefer open acces material is incompatible with the policy on using the best available sources. Could someone from the Foundation please respond to the idea of contacting universities and content database providers and inviting them to support Wikipedia by making a certain number of log-in IDs available, with the benefit -- to them -- that increased citation of high-quality publications would potentially make these publications visible to a larger audience? Is this something the Foundation would consider pursuing? Andreas ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- David Goodman DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Job openings - Bugmeister
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Jan Kucera (Kozuch) garba...@seznam.cz wrote: what about this job opening? Has it been filled already? Hi Jan, We've asked Mark Hershberger to step in as Bugmeister. More details: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2011-January/051185.html We plan to revisit this in the summer after we've filled some of our other positions. Mark may like the job so much and be well-suited enough to it that we keep him in the role. Rob ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Job openings - Bugmeister
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Jan Kucera (Kozuch) garba...@seznam.cz wrote: what about this job opening? Has it been filled already? Mark Hershberger (MAH) is fulfilling the role of Bugmeister and he's already started cleaning up Bugzilla. Id link to the announcement, but I'm not sure where it was. I'm CCing him if you have any questions. -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
2011/3/15 SlimVirgin slimvir...@gmail.com: Speaking of the CREDO accounts, several people have asked that their accounts be reassigned, but they don't know how to do it. Could Erik advise? See here -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Credo_accounts#I_gave_up_my_account_in_June As per my earlier message, Credo is willing to give away up to 400 additional accounts, so we really shouldn't be too worried about reassigning the existing ones until we've handed these out. Here's what I wrote in September: - - - - As a general update: Credo has generously offered a large number of additional accounts (up to 400 additional ones). The process that I used for the first batch was pretty clunky and time-consuming, so I've been using this as an opportunity to look into better strategies for Wikimedia to interface with external databases like Credo. As part of his contract work for the Wikimedia Foundation, User:^demon is currently evaluating what it would take to build a standard technical interface between Wikimedia and information providers (starting with an evaluation of EZproxy, a commonly used but unfortunately proprietary proxy for external databases). This is a slow-burn project, so I don't expect that we'll be able to find a solution quickly, but I hope we can keep moving this along steadily, as I think it could enable many more partnerships with information providers. In the short term, if someone wants to volunteer running a process to get an additional batch of user accounts (I need a spreadsheet of home wikis, e-mail addresses and user names, and enforcement of some reasonable minimum requirements like edit counts), I'd be more than happy to relay the final list to Credo and get those accounts created. That'd be easier than trying to identify and re-allocate unused accounts (which we can always do later if we run out of free ones). Anyone up for volunteering to run a process for an additional, say, 200 accounts? - - - Is anyone volunteering to organize the process for giving away these accounts? The September discussion stalled in lack of consensus about the parameters, but nobody actually stepped up to take this forward. Again, I can't spend a huge amount of time on this, but if someone volunteers to generate a list of usernames using whichever process is deemed acceptable, I'm happy to move it forward. I think Chad's project to look at technical parameters for interfacing with other databases stalled in the midst of the code review and release push, so let me ping him about getting that restarted. Erik -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Job openings - Bugmeister
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 12:30 AM, Casey Brown li...@caseybrown.org wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Jan Kucera (Kozuch) garba...@seznam.cz wrote: what about this job opening? Has it been filled already? Mark Hershberger (MAH) is fulfilling the role of Bugmeister and he's already started cleaning up Bugzilla. Id link to the announcement, but I'm not sure where it was. I'm CCing him if you have any questions. -- Casey Brown Cbrown1023 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l I don't think it was announced on Foundation-l, there was an announcement on wikitech-l. http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/221758 it was also covered in Signpost Tech report back in January. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-01-17/Technology_report Theo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 15:13, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: = Credo has generously offered a large number of additional accounts (up to 400 additional ones). The process that I used for the first batch was pretty clunky and time-consuming, so I've been using this as an opportunity to look into better strategies for Wikimedia to interface with external databases like Credo. As part of his contract work for the Wikimedia Foundation, User:^demon is currently evaluating what it would take to build a standard technical interface between Wikimedia and information providers (starting with an evaluation of EZproxy, a commonly used but unfortunately proprietary proxy for external databases). This is a slow-burn project, so I don't expect that we'll be able to find a solution quickly, but I hope we can keep moving this along steadily, as I think it could enable many more partnerships with information providers. In the short term, if someone wants to volunteer running a process to get an additional batch of user accounts (I need a spreadsheet of home wikis, e-mail addresses and user names, and enforcement of some reasonable minimum requirements like edit counts), I'd be more than happy to relay the final list to Credo and get those accounts created. That'd be easier than trying to identify and re-allocate unused accounts (which we can always do later if we run out of free ones). Anyone up for volunteering to run a process for an additional, say, 200 accounts? - - - Is anyone volunteering to organize the process for giving away these accounts? The September discussion stalled in lack of consensus about the parameters, but nobody actually stepped up to take this forward. Again, I can't spend a huge amount of time on this, but if someone volunteers to generate a list of usernames using whichever process is deemed acceptable, I'm happy to move it forward. I'd be willing to help organize the names. It's just a question of coming up with some sensible criteria, so I'll restart the discussion about that on the previous talk page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Credo_accounts Sarah ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: 2011/3/15 SlimVirgin slimvir...@gmail.com: Speaking of the CREDO accounts, several people have asked that their accounts be reassigned, but they don't know how to do it. Could Erik advise? See here -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Credo_accounts#I_gave_up_my_account_in_June As per my earlier message, Credo is willing to give away up to 400 additional accounts, so we really shouldn't be too worried about reassigning the existing ones until we've handed these out. Here's what I wrote in September: There are a few ex-Wikipedians on the current list. Not sure how you want to address that. -- John Vandenberg ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:18 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: 2011/3/15 SlimVirgin slimvir...@gmail.com: Speaking of the CREDO accounts, several people have asked that their accounts be reassigned, but they don't know how to do it. Could Erik advise? See here -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Credo_accounts#I_gave_up_my_account_in_June As per my earlier message, Credo is willing to give away up to 400 additional accounts, so we really shouldn't be too worried about reassigning the existing ones until we've handed these out. Here's what I wrote in September: There are a few ex-Wikipedians on the current list. Not sure how you want to address that. I'm also going to go to the talk page, but... I object to the GA/FA/etc requirement. There are a lot of content editors out there who won't go near the FA mafia. I use that term carefully, and hopefully without inciting a great backlash. The people involved in the GA/FA etc process are welcome as far as I am concerned to keep doing what they're doing, but I don't want membership in that community to be a gatekeeper requirement for other participation. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
As I stated on the talk page - I agree with the idea of some standard for reference-useful content contribution, and that FA/GA work would be one aspect of that. But I'd like that to be a category with one option of satisfying it being GA/FA work, rather than that being the only way to fulfil it. On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 6:08 PM, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote: I agree with that about FA/GA, possibly because I avoid that place myself, but for negotiating with publishers it would help to have a standard of some sort, in addition to a maximum number, so they would know they're not opening it up to the world in general, which is a matter of some concern to most of them. On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:10 PM, George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 3:18 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 8:13 AM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: 2011/3/15 SlimVirgin slimvir...@gmail.com: Speaking of the CREDO accounts, several people have asked that their accounts be reassigned, but they don't know how to do it. Could Erik advise? See here -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Credo_accounts#I_gave_up_my_account_in_June As per my earlier message, Credo is willing to give away up to 400 additional accounts, so we really shouldn't be too worried about reassigning the existing ones until we've handed these out. Here's what I wrote in September: There are a few ex-Wikipedians on the current list. Not sure how you want to address that. I'm also going to go to the talk page, but... I object to the GA/FA/etc requirement. There are a lot of content editors out there who won't go near the FA mafia. I use that term carefully, and hopefully without inciting a great backlash. The people involved in the GA/FA etc process are welcome as far as I am concerned to keep doing what they're doing, but I don't want membership in that community to be a gatekeeper requirement for other participation. -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- David Goodman DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- -george william herbert george.herb...@gmail.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
I can't speak for all my colleagues in the oa movement, as they disagree on almost every possible detail, and on almost every consideration of strategy, but I think most people there would regard taxpayer access both as a useful political slogan, and as a very productive strategy—a manner of proceeding through government regulation that can have a very wide and rapid effect--and that has indeed had one. For most of those in the movement, they do want all government sponsored work to be either PD or CC:BY, and most would extent this to all published journal literature whether directly government sponsored or not. But at this point, almost nobody considers a free license like this as really a practical first policy step, and all that is actually considered necessary is read-only access. Opinions differ about whether this must be to the final published form of the material. I think everyone involved regards the 6 or 12 month delayed-access permitted by the current government mandates to be a very unfortunate compromise, but necessary in order to get anything. On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:16 PM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:50 AM, Melissa Hagemann mhagem...@sorosny.org wrote: .. It would be wonderful if we could find a way for the WMF and OA communities to more closely collaborate. Aubrey is right in that to a large extent, OA is not well known outside the library community. Given the reach of WMF, there seems that there must be a way to try to raise greater awareness of the materials which are being made available through OA. There is an ever-increasing number of Wikipedia articles about journals, and they mention open access in the infobox ;-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proceedings_of_the_National_Academy_of_Sciences http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:AJ And if there is interest in advocating on this issue, SPARC developed the Alliance for Taxpayer Access (http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/action/index.shtml) which represents universities, libraries, patient advocacy groups, and physicians working to promote OA. I haven't heard of this before. The website/campaign name begs a lot of questions. Why tax-payer access only? What copyright license allows for tax-payer only redistribution? ;-) If I understand correctly, they are promoting unrestricted access to tax-payer funded research. Do they explicitly want govt-funded research to be public domain, like US federal works are, and therefore accessible to everyone, in every country? -- John Vandenberg ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- David Goodman DGG at the enWP http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
2011/3/15 SlimVirgin slimvir...@gmail.com: I'd be willing to help organize the names. It's just a question of coming up with some sensible criteria, so I'll restart the discussion about that on the previous talk page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Credo_accounts Thanks Sarah. It looks like the discussion is moving a bit in circles again -- if we can't reach a consensus, then I'd encourage you to just be bold and set something up (and be ready for the inevitable abuse ;-). One point to remember that may get lost in the en.wp discussion is that folks in other wikis (including other languages) may care about this as well. Last time I sent a note to wikipedia-l, which still has a fair number of subscribers from multiple languages. Also, people need to have an email address set, and consent to WMF looking it up and sharing it with Credo. -- Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Access to academic journals (was Re: Remarks on Wikimedia's fundraiser)
I agree with Aubrey, Melissa, SJ etc. We should indeed promote OA journals and thesis (give a look at http://www.dart-europe.eu : almost 200.000 full text OA from 324 universities and 19 countries automatically collected and searchable thanks to the magics of OA and OAI-PMH), and encourage OA publishers to promote their content on Wikimedia projects. I don't think that it's viable at all to acquire specific journal/database accounts; it's better to create a network of university students willing to provide references and articles on request. For instance, I've tried to do so and I offered to consult the World Biographical Information System Online to help people working on biographies (http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progetto:Biografie/Strumenti/Fonti ) but nobody has ever asked, so perhaps a global, more advertised program is needed. Another solution is to make university students edit; the fact that they have access to a lot of resources is one of the reasons for the public policy initiative/global university program. David Goodman, 15/03/2011 18:45: Universities can't do this, generally. All contracts I have ever seen limit the off-campus access to people connected with the university. A few publishers even limit the on-campus access similarly, but most publishers explicitly permit it. But many universities do even worse than the contracts say: they limit on-campus access in such a way as to not permit access to visitors. This is true even of some public universities. Various excuses are offerred, none of them valid--the usual one is lack of computer facilities, which lost its credibility a number of years ago. I confirm this for Italy (where additionally there isn't any status or actual affiliation for ex students). There may be another reason, though, i.e. that sometimes, if I recall correctly, fees are based not only on the number of students etc. but rather on the FTE (full time equivalent) students or professors etc. If you add random people it's very difficult to use those criteria, which are usually good to decrease costs. In general, those contracts are already horribly complicated and I doubt anyone would like to make things even worse. Nemo ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Sad for a wikimedian leaving on zhwiki
Jerry Wong also called wmrm, is a my friend. His blog: http://wmrblog.blogspot.com/ (have self deleted) cache: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0-vVZb9N7NYJ:wmrblog.blogspot.com/+wmrcd=2hl=zh-CNct=clnkclient=ubuntusource=www.google.com.hk his picasa also deleted https://picasaweb.google.com/wmr89502270/kkqEpBhttps://picasaweb.google.com/wmr89502270/kkqEpB# (he use real name) https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0-vVZb9N7NYJ:wmrblog.blogspot.com/+wmrcd=2hl=zh-CNct=clnkclient=ubuntusource=www.google.com.hkother post: http://stevenfive.blogspot.com/2011/02/wmr.html https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:0-vVZb9N7NYJ:wmrblog.blogspot.com/+wmrcd=2hl=zh-CNct=clnkclient=ubuntusource=www.google.com.hk Chinese wikipedia: http://zh.wikipedia.org/ My blog: http://shizhao.org twitter: https://twitter.com/shizhao [[zh:User:Shizhao]] 2011/3/14 HW waihor...@yahoo.com.hk Dear all, I am just so sad for a wikimedian leaving which active on zhwiki commons. User:JerryofWong, a wikipedia editor on zhwiki, a upload on commons. In zhwiki VP, this user said I can't access Internet any more. Stasi threaten me and asked my parents to stop my internet connection.--Jerry Wong (留言) 2011年3月11日 (五) 10:55 (UTC) And the reason, you can look at the photo this user upload on commons. Thank you for your attention. HW (User:Waihorace) ___ 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] Sad for a wikimedian leaving on zhwiki
sorry, wmrm is wmr. 2011/3/16 shi zhao shiz...@gmail.com wmrm ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
