Re: [Foundation-l] Farsi wikipedia now has 150000 articles
Congratulations! Ting On 22.05.2011 21:20, wrote Mardetanha: Dear all fellow wikipedian and wikimedians I am so pleased to announce some minutes ago Farsi wikipedia has reached 15 articles. Mardetanha ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- Ting Ting's Blog: http://wingphilopp.blogspot.com/ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] No rights to participate
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 18:44, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: My point Fred, is there is no such animal. So calling something a private website is redundant, since all websites are private, there are no public websites. Certainly there are websites owned by governments, but they are not public in the sense above that there is guaranteed access to *modify* their contents. Let's turn it the other way: there is hardly _any_ objects on the internet where anyone have the legal *right* to do anything at all. (Be that websites or other services.) Local governmental sites may offer local citizens services which they do have legal right to access and the provider have no right to deny them access, but I'm sure even these sites have terms of service which makes it possible to deny these rights for certain behaviours. I doubt anyone would provide an internationally accessible service usable by people's personal rights, ever. So, the original question was wrong and the answer was proper: nobody have legal right to use the Wikimedia projects (or, in fact, any websites), and no court could probably enforce that against the terms of the services of the given site. (Maybe not even beyond that, at all.) Every websites are private property, and you're either a customer using the service, or related to the owner somehow; in all other cases you're fobidden to utilise someone else's resources, and you may be offered legal charges for that. g ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
On 05/22/2011 07:39 PM, Andre Engels wrote: On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 7:13 PM, wjhon...@aol.com wrote: You're missing my point. All the Latin languages share a common writing system and only differ in the way the language is spoken. Address the point that the words within the system have the same semantic *meaning* and are formed with the same syntactic rules. If Bo Dow Kah means your dog is dead in one language or dialect, but Bo Dow Kah means your mother is pretty in another, than the fact that the spelling is the same, has no relevance to the issue at hand. In Chinese writing a character shows a word, irrespective of how the word is pronounced. So if we would use a Chinese style writing system, you could write [your] [dog] [is] [dead], and a Frenchman would write exactly the same, even though he would pronounce [your] [dog] [is] [dead] as Votre chien est mort. Thus, different languages might write the same sentence the same in Chinese script. This does not mean that there are no differences - someone who spoke Latin would probably spell this line as [dog] [your] [dead] [is], and perhaps in yet another language this would be immensely crude, and the right thing to say would be [prepare for bad news] [honorific person] [your] [dog] [is] [not] [alive], but the mere difference of being in a different language with totally different sounds is not enough to conclude that in Chinese writing the actual written text will be different. Andre, that's not accurate explanation. Chinese script is not purely logographic, but logo-syllabic (or logo-phonetic). There are *phonetic* parts inside of the writing system. From the article [1]: By far the most numerous category are the phono-semantic compounds, also called semantic-phonetic compounds or pictophonetic compounds. These characters are composed of two parts: one of a limited set of pictographs, often graphically simplified, which suggests the general meaning of the character, and an existing character pronounced approximately as the new target word. Examples are 河 hé river, 湖 hú lake, 流 liú stream, 沖 chōng riptide (or flush), 滑 huá slippery. All these characters have on the left a radical of three short strokes, which is a simplified pictograph for a river, indicating that the character has a semantic connection with water; the right-hand side in each case is a phonetic indicator. For example, in the case of 沖 chōng (Old Chinese /druŋ/[46]), the phonetic indicator is 中 zhōng (Old Chinese /truŋ/[47]), which by itself means middle. In this case it can be seen that the pronunciation of the character is slightly different from that of its phonetic indicator; this process means that the composition of such characters can sometimes seem arbitrary today. Further, the choice of radicals may also seem arbitrary in some cases; for example, the radical of 貓 māo cat is 豸 zhì, originally a pictograph for worms,[citation needed] but in characters of this sort indicating an animal of any kind. Xu Shen (c. 100 CE) placed approximately 82% of characters into this category, while in the Kangxi Dictionary (1716 CE) the number is closer to 90%, due to the extremely productive use of this technique to extend the Chinese vocabulary. This method is still sometimes used to form new characters, for example 钚 bù plutonium) is the metal radical 金 jīn plus the phonetic component 不 bù, described in Chinese as 不 gives sound, 金 gives meaning. Many Chinese names of elements in the periodic table and many other chemistry-related characters were formed this way. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_script#Phono-semantic_compounds ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
On 05/23/2011 10:33 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: This method is still sometimes used to form new characters, for example 钚 bù plutonium) is the metal radical 金 jīn plus the phonetic component 不 bù, described in Chinese as 不 gives sound, 金 gives meaning. Many Chinese names of elements in the periodic table and many other chemistry-related characters were formed this way. BTW, I am really amazed by the fact that bu means plutonium :) ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
On 05/23/2011 10:33 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: In Chinese writing a character shows a word, irrespective of how the word is pronounced. So if we would use a Chinese style writing system, you could write [your] [dog] [is] [dead], and a Frenchman would write exactly the same, even though he would pronounce [your] [dog] [is] [dead] as Votre chien est mort. Thus, different languages might write the same sentence the same in Chinese script. This does not mean that there are no differences - someone who spoke Latin would probably spell this line as [dog] [your] [dead] [is], and perhaps in yet another language this would be immensely crude, and the right thing to say would be [prepare for bad news] [honorific person] [your] [dog] [is] [not] [alive], but the mere difference of being in a different language with totally different sounds is not enough to conclude that in Chinese writing the actual written text will be different. Andre, that's not accurate explanation. Chinese script is not purely logographic, but logo-syllabic (or logo-phonetic). There are *phonetic* parts inside of the writing system. But different Chinese languages will still use the same character for different but related phonetic component. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
On 05/23/2011 10:33 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: In Chinese writing a character shows a word, irrespective of how the word is pronounced. So if we would use a Chinese style writing system, you could write [your] [dog] [is] [dead], and a Frenchman would write exactly the same, even though he would pronounce [your] [dog] [is] [dead] as Votre chien est mort. Thus, different languages might write the same sentence the same in Chinese script. This does not mean that there are no differences - someone who spoke Latin would probably spell this line as [dog] [your] [dead] [is], and perhaps in yet another language this would be immensely crude, and the right thing to say would be [prepare for bad news] [honorific person] [your] [dog] [is] [not] [alive], but the mere difference of being in a different language with totally different sounds is not enough to conclude that in Chinese writing the actual written text will be different. Andre, that's not accurate explanation. Chinese script is not purely logographic, but logo-syllabic (or logo-phonetic). There are *phonetic* parts inside of the writing system. But different Chinese languages will still use the same character for different but related phonetic component. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Internal-l] Worthy Online Resource, but Global Cultural Treasure? (The New York Times)
cross-posting _ *Béria Lima* Wikimedia Portugal http://wikimedia.pt (351) 963 953 042 *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.* 2011/5/23 Steven Walling swall...@wikimedia.org Interesting press with direct link to ten.wikipedia.org. :-) Nice work Wikimedia Deutschland! Worthy Online Resource, but Global Cultural Treasure? By Kevin J. O'Brien http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/23/technology/23wikipedia.html?_r=1hpw=pagewanted=all BERLIN — In its 10 years of existence, Wikipedia, the global online encyclopedia, has amassed an archive of 18 million entries in 279 languages. It is one of the 10 most popular Web sites on the Internet. But is the volunteer-driven data depository an endangered world cultural treasure worthy of protection, like French cuisine, the Argentine tango or the Grand Canyon? That is the long-shot bet being made by Wikipedia, which plans to begin a global petition drive Tuesday to earn a spot on one of the world heritage lists of the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. The bid, the first by a digital entity for a place on a Unesco list, will no doubt be controversial among heritage professionals advising Unesco, who tend to view online innovation as lacking the necessary effect or maturity for listing. “Heritage professionals tend to be rather conservative types, or they wouldn’t choose this kind of occupation,” said Britta Rudolff, a heritage consultant who teaches on the subject at the Brandenburg University of Technology in Cottbus, Germany. “They like to play with the past, and something only a decade old is going to face challenges.” The idea of landing Wikipedia on a Unesco world heritage list came out of Germany, where volunteers have produced 1.2 million entries, second only to the number in English. Wikipedia’s German overseer, a Berlin nonprofit called Wikimedia, proposed the idea in March to Wikipedia chapters at a global conference in the German capital. The reception was enthusiastic, said a Wikipedia co-founder, Jimmy Wales. “The basic idea is to recognize that Wikipedia is this amazing global cultural phenomena that has transformed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people,” Mr. Wales said in an interview. He said the online encyclopedia had helped educate people around the world, providing a wealth of basic facts, background information and key context. Mr. Wales also said that one aim of the petition drive — supporters can register at a special Web page, Wikipedia 10 — is to raise awareness of Wikipedia. “Of course, part of what we are trying to do is promote the idea of Wikipedia as a cultural phenomenon,” Mr. Wales said. “Too often, people think about us purely in terms of technology, when this is about culture, high tech and learning.” Wikipedia is hoping to earn a place on Unesco’s most prestigious list, the World Heritage List, which so far includes only historic monuments and natural sites like the Great Barrier Reef and the Great Wall of China. Failing that, Wikipedia could aim for Unesco’s Intangible Cultural Heritage List, a lesser-known directory that includes endangered traditions and practices, like flamenco. Getting Wikipedia on either list will be an uphill battle. It will have to negotiate a complicated approval process and overcome the skeptical regard of Unesco and heritage consultants to be considered for recognition. Susan Williams, the head of external media relations at Unesco in Paris, said a bid by a digital entity like Wikipedia would be unprecedented. “Anyone can apply,” said Ms. Williams, who added that she was not aware of Wikipedia’s plans. “But it may have difficulty fulfilling the criteria.” One of the criteria for inclusion, she said, is that the culture or practice be endangered. She said that Wikipedia might consider applying for a third, even less known honor, the Unesco Memory of the World Register list, which recognizes valuable archive holdings and library collections. That list, however, lacks the prestige of the others, which are funded more generously and promoted more assiduously by Unesco and its member countries. Mr. Wales said Wikipedia was hoping to set off a debate over the role of digital innovation in world culture. While Wikipedia, which allows anyone to write or edit entries, has had problems with accuracy and plagiarism, the organization has worked to improve its editorial controls and to help people in repressive or less affluent societies. In Iran, where the government has periodically shut down or censored portions of Wikipedia’s service, the online Web site is helping young Iranians obtain information on health issues like HIV and has given some a rare forum to post information and share views about recent anti-government demonstrations. “I think Wikipedia is playing a significant role
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
On 05/23/2011 10:55 AM, Nikola Smolenski wrote: On 05/23/2011 10:33 AM, Milos Rancic wrote: In Chinese writing a character shows a word, irrespective of how the word is pronounced. So if we would use a Chinese style writing system, you could write [your] [dog] [is] [dead], and a Frenchman would write exactly the same, even though he would pronounce [your] [dog] [is] [dead] as Votre chien est mort. Thus, different languages might write the same sentence the same in Chinese script. This does not mean that there are no differences - someone who spoke Latin would probably spell this line as [dog] [your] [dead] [is], and perhaps in yet another language this would be immensely crude, and the right thing to say would be [prepare for bad news] [honorific person] [your] [dog] [is] [not] [alive], but the mere difference of being in a different language with totally different sounds is not enough to conclude that in Chinese writing the actual written text will be different. Andre, that's not accurate explanation. Chinese script is not purely logographic, but logo-syllabic (or logo-phonetic). There are *phonetic* parts inside of the writing system. But different Chinese languages will still use the same character for different but related phonetic component. That's living process in Chinese languages. While for phonetic transcription of an old word Classical Chinese knowledge is required (or learning pronunciation as-is), it is possible to create a dialectal compound. However, I can just guess is it true or not. And our fellow Chinese Wikimedians could give to us some information regarding that. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native language
Here is the article at Strategy wiki: http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Missing_Wikipedias Some important ideas have been mentioned during this discussion. Feel free to add them there. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Interesting legal action
On 5/23/11 1:40 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 23 May 2011 00:03, FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Out of interest, when a BLP is created and not speedy deleted, could we not write a standard email to the subject stating that a biographical article has been created on them on the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, inviting them to review it, explaining what it's about, and pointing them to remedies for fixing minor or major issues or requesting deletion? Hearing from us might at the very least be seen as us trying to do something right. I've not heard that idea before; I like it. We should do that. It wouldn't be difficult and would, as you say, show that we are at least trying to do the right thing. We would need to be prepared to deal with the increased traffic to OTRS that it would inevitably result in, but that's not too big a problem. I don't think it's impossible, but I think finding an email address for the average person is going to be harder than you think. I do a good bit of email-finding to contact journal-paper authors whose email address has changed from the one published in the journal, but especially outside of the sciences, this isn't particularly easy. Many professors have no websites, and many who do don't have an email address on the site. You end up having to dig up the university's find person database and search, and sometimes that database isn't even publicly available. And for celebrities, they actively go out of their way to hide their email. CEOs and similar in the business world usually don't have emails publicly listed either. At the very least, it'd be quite a bit of work, and would probably require someone willing to use non-email communication channels, like LinkedIn messaging or Twitter or something, to achieve reasonable coverage. Might be an interesting experiment. -Mark ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
When words are from the same root, the same character is generally used regardless of modern pronunciation. In Traditional Chinese, phonetic elements are mostly based on older pronunciations which might not make sense in all modern Sinitic languages; sometimes in Simplified Chinese these are replaced by phonetic elements based on Mandarin pronunciation. However, Milos, I believe you have misinterpreted logophonetic here. Although the script has phonetic elements, this does not mean that the phonetic elements are based on modern pronunciations. So for example, 西瓜 is the word for watermelon in every Sinitic language (as far as I'm aware). In Mandarin it is pronounced xi gua; in Cantonese it is sai gwaa, in Min Nan it is sai koe, in Shanghainese Wu it is si kwo (I have not noted tones here due to different tone systems in these languages). In spite of differing words, since they are all from the same etymological root, they are all written exactly the same way with the same characters. This is probably not the best example since neither of these characters has a phonetic element, but that is irrelevant because even if they did the case would be the same. What DOES make Sinitic (Chinese) languages different when written is the following (*this is important*): Words that are not etymologically related to the equivalent in other Sinitic languages are often/usually written differently; grammar and syntax can be different (as an example, in Shanghai Wu you can say We drink coffee as Ala kafi che which is literally We coffee drink; in Mandarin it would be said as Women he kafei, literally We drink coffee, notice the different word order), including grammatical particles which have no direct equivalent. Imagine for a moment that English and Spanish used a similar writing system. I want you to give me a piece of bread and Quiero que me des un pedacito de pan would be written differently due to differing grammar: I want you to give me a piece of bread would be written as [I] [WANT] [YOU] [TO] [GIVE] [ME] [A] [PIECE] [OF] [BREAD] Quiero que me des un pedacito de pan would be written as [WANT]-[FIRST PERSON SINGULAR] [THAT] [TO-ME] [GIVE]-[SECOND PERSON SINGULAR SUBJUNCTIVE] [A] [PIECE]-[DIMINUTIVE] [OF] [BREAD]. Also, Cuando va a llegar Maria? (accents missing) and When is Maria going to arrive? Cuando va a llegar Maria? would be written as [WHEN] [GO]-[THIRD PERSON SINGULAR] [TO] [ARRIVE] [MARIA] When is Maria going to arrive? would be written as [WHEN] [IS] [MARIA] [GOING TO] [ARRIVE] or something like that. Note here that the arrive comes after Maria in English, but before in Spanish. These are relatively simple examples, but although in many ways English and Spanish (and many other Western European languages) have relatively similar syntax (as compared to, say, Asian, African or American languages) and are related, due to these grammar differences it would be impossible to unify them in writing. It is essentially the same case with Sinitic languages. However, there is another issue at play here: the classification of Sinitic languages and dialects is a bit controversial, and it is possible that some of these languages identified by the Ethnologue would not want or need a separate version. Jin Chinese, for example, is often identified as a divergent dialect of Mandarin, and I'm doubtful that a Wikipedia written in Jin in Chinese characters would differ substantially from zh.wp, and almost certain (though I am willing to be proven wrong) that they would not differ enough in writing to merit separate Wikipedias. Also, I am somewhat doubtful that varieties such as Puxian, with 2.5 million speakers who are almost all highly literate in Standard Chinese (=written Mandarin), would ever have enough editors or readers to amount to much. Sinitic Wikipedias we currently have, such as Cantonese, Wu and two of the Min languages, are fortunate to have much larger numbers of speakers, existing tradition of literature written in them, and a very high degree of regional linguistic pride (especially noted for Cantonese). So varieties such as Puxian, Min Zhong, Pinghua and Huizhou seem unlikely to attract enough attention to be viable projects. I also wonder, with regards to Arabic varities, if it is really in our best interests to follow Ethnologue classifications, which often follow national borders rather than linguistic boundaries. For example, I have been told that Moroccan, Tunisian, Libyan and Algerian Arabic are all easily mutually intelligible, often considered a single language called Derija. I am certainly in favor of having Wikipedias in colloquial varities of Arabic, but I don't know that it is wise to encourage maximal linguistic balkanization and division of resources when it is possible to allow people to coalesce around a common language. Rather than blindly following the Ethnologue, I would advocate a greater reliance on expert opinion and advice, and advocacy with ISO committee when necessary to get
Re: [Foundation-l] Interesting legal action
A specific email address isn't always available but virtually anyone notable will have a method of contact that can be found fairly quickly. Businesspeople have a business, academics have their university website, politicians and high ranking officials have a political website or governmental office, authors have a publisher, and a vast number of people have an easily located personal website, agent, or known organization they are closely affiliated with. Even alleged criminals have a lawyer or a means of contact. The kind of stuff needed for contact details is almost always noted in any keepable BLP, or a minute's web searching. A few may need Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, but I suspect not many. Only a very small minority will not be easily identified with a means of email or other direct contact within a few minutes. Worth it, I think. FT2 On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote: On 5/23/11 1:40 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 23 May 2011 00:03, FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Out of interest, when a BLP is created and not speedy deleted, could we not write a standard email to the subject stating that a biographical article has been created on them on the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, inviting them to review it, explaining what it's about, and pointing them to remedies for fixing minor or major issues or requesting deletion? Hearing from us might at the very least be seen as us trying to do something right. I've not heard that idea before; I like it. We should do that. It wouldn't be difficult and would, as you say, show that we are at least trying to do the right thing. We would need to be prepared to deal with the increased traffic to OTRS that it would inevitably result in, but that's not too big a problem. I don't think it's impossible, but I think finding an email address for the average person is going to be harder than you think. I do a good bit of email-finding to contact journal-paper authors whose email address has changed from the one published in the journal, but especially outside of the sciences, this isn't particularly easy. Many professors have no websites, and many who do don't have an email address on the site. You end up having to dig up the university's find person database and search, and sometimes that database isn't even publicly available. And for celebrities, they actively go out of their way to hide their email. CEOs and similar in the business world usually don't have emails publicly listed either. At the very least, it'd be quite a bit of work, and would probably require someone willing to use non-email communication channels, like LinkedIn messaging or Twitter or something, to achieve reasonable coverage. Might be an interesting experiment. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Interesting legal action
I'm not so sure. As much as living persons have a history of raising/catching important errors in their articles, they also take exception to negative material. I had one rather protracted issue with a BLP where the individual feels he has been attacked by other parties and the media for a number of years. He viewed the associated Wikipedia articles (which were reasonably balanced, but did include negative information about him) as an extension of that attack. His attempts to insert his version of the truth caused disruption, but more importantly it really really upset him. I can forsee this happening a lot more if we *tell* everyone they have a biography :) Sending something like that out is basically an invitation to edit their biography; and the combination of being a WP newbie, and writing about themselves is not usually a good one. If we can address that issue at the same time, then sure, it's a good idea. Tom On 23 May 2011 14:28, FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: A specific email address isn't always available but virtually anyone notable will have a method of contact that can be found fairly quickly. Businesspeople have a business, academics have their university website, politicians and high ranking officials have a political website or governmental office, authors have a publisher, and a vast number of people have an easily located personal website, agent, or known organization they are closely affiliated with. Even alleged criminals have a lawyer or a means of contact. The kind of stuff needed for contact details is almost always noted in any keepable BLP, or a minute's web searching. A few may need Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, but I suspect not many. Only a very small minority will not be easily identified with a means of email or other direct contact within a few minutes. Worth it, I think. FT2 On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote: On 5/23/11 1:40 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 23 May 2011 00:03, FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Out of interest, when a BLP is created and not speedy deleted, could we not write a standard email to the subject stating that a biographical article has been created on them on the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, inviting them to review it, explaining what it's about, and pointing them to remedies for fixing minor or major issues or requesting deletion? Hearing from us might at the very least be seen as us trying to do something right. I've not heard that idea before; I like it. We should do that. It wouldn't be difficult and would, as you say, show that we are at least trying to do the right thing. We would need to be prepared to deal with the increased traffic to OTRS that it would inevitably result in, but that's not too big a problem. I don't think it's impossible, but I think finding an email address for the average person is going to be harder than you think. I do a good bit of email-finding to contact journal-paper authors whose email address has changed from the one published in the journal, but especially outside of the sciences, this isn't particularly easy. Many professors have no websites, and many who do don't have an email address on the site. You end up having to dig up the university's find person database and search, and sometimes that database isn't even publicly available. And for celebrities, they actively go out of their way to hide their email. CEOs and similar in the business world usually don't have emails publicly listed either. At the very least, it'd be quite a bit of work, and would probably require someone willing to use non-email communication channels, like LinkedIn messaging or Twitter or something, to achieve reasonable coverage. Might be an interesting experiment. ___ 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] Interesting legal action
I agree with the point you make, but still think it's the right thing. Essentially the counter argument boils down to if they don't know there's a BLP they can't make work for us about it. Whatever is in the BLP will be there whether they know it or not. So the question is, is it ethically better, and likely to improve quality, if they do know about it? Probably yes. We will for sure get some irate replies or requests that we simply can't meet (ie demands or expectations that won't work with a neutral reference site). But we will also be recognized as trying to do right in a way few other sources do. I don't think that the problem outweighs the clear benefits of doing so. I'm also inclined to believe innate human decency will help us - a few people act like jerks but the majority, given a fair explanation, will appreciate the effort, thank us, understand they are being consulted on any issues they notice, and try to help. Maybe we can design a possible email, experiment on a couple of batches of 30 - 50 newly created and older BLPs, and see what happens? FT2 On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:34 PM, Thomas Morton morton.tho...@googlemail.com wrote: I'm not so sure. As much as living persons have a history of raising/catching important errors in their articles, they also take exception to negative material. I had one rather protracted issue with a BLP where the individual feels he has been attacked by other parties and the media for a number of years. He viewed the associated Wikipedia articles (which were reasonably balanced, but did include negative information about him) as an extension of that attack. His attempts to insert his version of the truth caused disruption, but more importantly it really really upset him. I can forsee this happening a lot more if we *tell* everyone they have a biography :) Sending something like that out is basically an invitation to edit their biography; and the combination of being a WP newbie, and writing about themselves is not usually a good one. If we can address that issue at the same time, then sure, it's a good idea. Tom On 23 May 2011 14:28, FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: A specific email address isn't always available but virtually anyone notable will have a method of contact that can be found fairly quickly. Businesspeople have a business, academics have their university website, politicians and high ranking officials have a political website or governmental office, authors have a publisher, and a vast number of people have an easily located personal website, agent, or known organization they are closely affiliated with. Even alleged criminals have a lawyer or a means of contact. The kind of stuff needed for contact details is almost always noted in any keepable BLP, or a minute's web searching. A few may need Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, but I suspect not many. Only a very small minority will not be easily identified with a means of email or other direct contact within a few minutes. Worth it, I think. FT2 On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Delirium delir...@hackish.org wrote: On 5/23/11 1:40 AM, Thomas Dalton wrote: On 23 May 2011 00:03, FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Out of interest, when a BLP is created and not speedy deleted, could we not write a standard email to the subject stating that a biographical article has been created on them on the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, inviting them to review it, explaining what it's about, and pointing them to remedies for fixing minor or major issues or requesting deletion? Hearing from us might at the very least be seen as us trying to do something right. I've not heard that idea before; I like it. We should do that. It wouldn't be difficult and would, as you say, show that we are at least trying to do the right thing. We would need to be prepared to deal with the increased traffic to OTRS that it would inevitably result in, but that's not too big a problem. I don't think it's impossible, but I think finding an email address for the average person is going to be harder than you think. I do a good bit of email-finding to contact journal-paper authors whose email address has changed from the one published in the journal, but especially outside of the sciences, this isn't particularly easy. Many professors have no websites, and many who do don't have an email address on the site. You end up having to dig up the university's find person database and search, and sometimes that database isn't even publicly available. And for celebrities, they actively go out of their way to hide their email. CEOs and similar in the business world usually don't have emails publicly listed either. At the very least, it'd be quite a bit of work, and would probably require someone willing to use non-email communication channels, like LinkedIn
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
On 05/23/2011 03:04 PM, M. Williamson wrote: When words are from the same root, the same character is generally used regardless of modern pronunciation. In Traditional Chinese, phonetic elements are mostly based on older pronunciations which might not make sense in all modern Sinitic languages; sometimes in Simplified Chinese these are replaced by phonetic elements based on Mandarin pronunciation. However, Milos, I believe you have misinterpreted logophonetic here. Although the script has phonetic elements, this does not mean that the phonetic elements are based on modern pronunciations. So for example, 西瓜 is the word for watermelon in every Sinitic language (as far as I'm aware). In Mandarin it is pronounced xi gua; in Cantonese it is sai gwaa, in Min Nan it is sai koe, in Shanghainese Wu it is si kwo (I have not noted tones here due to different tone systems in these languages). In spite of differing words, since they are all from the same etymological root, they are all written exactly the same way with the same characters. This is probably not the best example since neither of these characters has a phonetic element, but that is irrelevant because even if they did the case would be the same. What DOES make Sinitic (Chinese) languages different when written is the following (*this is important*): Words that are not etymologically related to the equivalent in other Sinitic languages are often/usually written differently; grammar and syntax can be different (as an example, in Shanghai Wu you can say We drink coffee as Ala kafi che which is literally We coffee drink; in Mandarin it would be said as Women he kafei, literally We drink coffee, notice the different word order), including grammatical particles which have no direct equivalent. Imagine for a moment that English and Spanish used a similar writing system. I want you to give me a piece of bread and Quiero que me des un pedacito de pan would be written differently due to differing grammar: I want you to give me a piece of bread would be written as [I] [WANT] [YOU] [TO] [GIVE] [ME] [A] [PIECE] [OF] [BREAD] Quiero que me des un pedacito de pan would be written as [WANT]-[FIRST PERSON SINGULAR] [THAT] [TO-ME] [GIVE]-[SECOND PERSON SINGULAR SUBJUNCTIVE] [A] [PIECE]-[DIMINUTIVE] [OF] [BREAD]. Also, Cuando va a llegar Maria? (accents missing) and When is Maria going to arrive? Cuando va a llegar Maria? would be written as [WHEN] [GO]-[THIRD PERSON SINGULAR] [TO] [ARRIVE] [MARIA] When is Maria going to arrive? would be written as [WHEN] [IS] [MARIA] [GOING TO] [ARRIVE] or something like that. Note here that the arrive comes after Maria in English, but before in Spanish. These are relatively simple examples, but although in many ways English and Spanish (and many other Western European languages) have relatively similar syntax (as compared to, say, Asian, African or American languages) and are related, due to these grammar differences it would be impossible to unify them in writing. It is essentially the same case with Sinitic languages. Mark, thank you very much for making things clear! However, there is another issue at play here: the classification of Sinitic languages and dialects is a bit controversial, and it is possible that some of these languages identified by the Ethnologue would not want or need a separate version. Jin Chinese, for example, is often identified as a divergent dialect of Mandarin, and I'm doubtful that a Wikipedia written in Jin in Chinese characters would differ substantially from zh.wp, and almost certain (though I am willing to be proven wrong) that they would not differ enough in writing to merit separate Wikipedias. ... I would ask you personally (but, others, too) to give your opinions toward as many as possible missing languages inside of notes sections at [1] or inside newly created articles inside of the namespace of that page (let's say, [[Missing Wikipedias/Spoken Arabic varieties]]). Such additions would be very valuable: if there are people who don't need Wikimedia projects editions, we can spend our resources on those who need. Macrolanguage editions of Wikimedia projects are not anymore taboo. If it is more reasonable to use one project for a number of closely related languages *and* communities want that, there is no reason why not to allow that. [1] http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Missing_Wikipedias ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] WikifyIndia
Dear Wikimedians, Below is a note we sent on the India Mailing list. Bishakha (from the Board of Trustees) thought its a good idea to send it on this forum. We've told her and mentioned it on the site that WikifyIndia owes it all to Wikipedia and the fantastic community behind it. Our thanks to you all. Anish and Sohel (User:Sbohra) -- We interact with the government on multiple occasions. The problems are all too familiar - complex systems, official apathy, corruption - just to name a few. Some trivia and stats to qualify these claims: * Entrepreneurs identified increasing the speed and ease of issuing permits; lowering taxes; and reducing the time it takes to start a business as key issues. (Note - All issues relate to government interactions; Source - Legatum Institute) * In Mumbai, there are 37 procedural hoops to jump through to gain approval to build a warehouse. (Source : World Bank) * On the Corruption Perception Index (2010), India ranks 87th of 178 countries * Indians are highest ranked for volume of search for terms such as government rules, passport and registration (Source - Google Trends) Here's where WikifyIndia - a wiki of government procedures - kicks in. If Wikipedia is the Thinkers Encyclopedia, WikifyIndia is the Doer's Encyclopedia The ordinary citizen suffers because good information on government procedures is unavailable. Agents distort information to suit themselves. Officials are rarely friendly. The best solution has always been to ask someone who has ‘been through the grind’. WikifyIndia does it on a national level. The scope is wide ranging. From getting into the armed forces to filing a Right To Information request, from complaining about a broken traffic signal to opening a restaurant, from changing your name to adopting a child, from applying for euthanasia to marrying in court, from getting a gun permit to filing your taxes, from getting a travel permit to getting a gas connection, it will all be there. www.wikifyindia.com Every article is expected to have a short intro, requirements/eligibility, procedure, list of documents, timings, fees, application form, sample certificate among other details. Unlike Wikipedia, WikifyIndia is also a forum. There is merit in aggregating experiences (for ex. visa experiences can be quite varied). Current approaches on the internet are inadequate. Information is incomplete and outdated. Wikipedia has proved that a bottom up approach is far more suitable in some areas than any top down approach (where a group is formally trying to organise information). Even if someone did a good job, they wouldn't be able to distribute it for free. WikifyIndia complements Wikipedia. The article on Civil Marriage in Wikipedia is written differently from the same article on WikifyIndia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_marriage http://www.wikifyindia.com/wiki/Civil_Marriage When the site has adequate accurate content, it will reduce what economists call 'transaction costs'. Any tool to improve productivity of citizens, entrepreneurs and organisations will be directly contributing to the Indian economy. WikifyIndia is a non-profit initiative free of advertising and is being run by a small fund created by the Founders. The goal is for every government procedure to be available in every Indian language with complete and accurate guidelines. If a farmer's wife in Manipur wants to get employed under the Rural Employment Gurantee Scheme, she should have all the information and forms on the site in her own language. Thank you for your time and patience, Anish and Sohel [User:Sbohra] ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Informing BLP subjects
Re the idea of informing BLP subjects that we have a biography on them. Whilst some subjects of BLPs would be quite easy to contact via Email, there are those who won't be. Especially the ones who are now senile or in jail. While most of the subjects of our BLPs are fine upstanding members of society, some are in jail and others deserve to be. Allegedly a quarter of our editors are legally minors, I would be uncomfortable with any new process that involved us encouraging adolescents to email strangers or that classified the subjects of our BLPs into those suitable or unsuitable to be contacted. There is a practical issue about informing people when we have articles on them in scores of languages. During next years Olympics there will be new sports stars emerging who suddenly have articles created about them on scores of different language versions of Wikipedias. Having a separate notification of each one would probably be seen as spam, but checking whether someone had already been notified via the intrawiki links would be difficult - even the death anomaly project only attempts to work across 80 language versions. So this would require quite a team of volunteers, especially if you included one of the larger language versions such as English, and especially if you restricted this to our older editors. Finding volunteers to do this and continue to recruit as they leave might be difficult. I can't see either the article creators or the newpage patrollers accepting this as an additional task even if we weren't worried about inviting adolescents to email Mafiosi and so forth. Also there is a serious risk of raising false expectations, over here there was a recent unsuccessful legal attempt to put the onus on the newspapers to inform subjects before they wrote about them. That didn't differentiate between writing bios on people or naming them as part of another story, and I think we would have difficulty holding the line that a one paragraph article on one person was fundamentally different to a similar length mention in a match report or an article about a Rock group or terrorist incident. In my experience a large proportion of our BLP violations don't take place in BLPs, but a policy of informing people whenever we named them on wiki would be even less practical than one of informing them when we wrote an article about them. WereSpielChequers Message: 7 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 00:40:10 +0100 From: Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Interesting legal action To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: BANLkTi=kr4fvov12n-72shypkm5on5y...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 23 May 2011 00:03, FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: Out of interest, when a BLP is created and not speedy deleted, could we not write a standard email to the subject stating that a biographical article has been created on them on the online encyclopedia Wikipedia, inviting them to review it, explaining what it's about, and pointing them to remedies for fixing minor or major issues or requesting deletion? Hearing from us might at the very least be seen as us trying to do something right. I've not heard that idea before; I like it. We should do that. It wouldn't be difficult and would, as you say, show that we are at least trying to do the right thing. We would need to be prepared to deal with the increased traffic to OTRS that it would inevitably result in, but that's not too big a problem. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Informing BLP subjects
On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 16:46, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote: Re the idea of informing BLP subjects that we have a biography on them. Most LPs would read such email as a request for editing, which is basically removing negative parts (regardless of its sourcing) and boosting positive parts, possibly include lots of irrelevant details. That is my _guess_, based on a specific LP I know [myself]. :) [[user:grin]] ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Interesting legal action
My experience at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_reports/Living_people_on_EN_wiki_who_are_dead_on_other_wikis is that however famous a sportsperson was in the 40s, 50s and 60s, getting a reliable source to confirm their death is not always easy. Hence we have quite a backlog where a non-English wikipedia thinks someone is dead but we don't yet have a reliable source to justify changing EN wiki. I'm pretty sure that an email address for the same age group would be much harder, especially if they are still alive and have not yet had an obituary published about them; or we don't have anyone in the relevant task group who is confident to deal with sources in that particular language. People notable for a something in the last year or two probably would be easier to get hold of, but I don't think the proposal is only for these unspecified volunteers to do this where it is easy to do so. WereSpielChequers Message: 3 Date: Mon, 23 May 2011 14:28:11 +0100 From: FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Interesting legal action To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: BANLkTinaY0mykAd_-C-wOG=jr_+qoh2...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 A specific email address isn't always available but virtually anyone notable will have a method of contact that can be found fairly quickly. Businesspeople have a business, academics have their university website, politicians and high ranking officials have a political website or governmental office, authors have a publisher, and a vast number of people have an easily located personal website, agent, or known organization they are closely affiliated with. Even alleged criminals have a lawyer or a means of contact. The kind of stuff needed for contact details is almost always noted in any keepable BLP, or a minute's web searching. A few may need Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, but I suspect not many. Only a very small minority will not be easily identified with a means of email or other direct contact within a few minutes. Worth it, I think. FT2 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Informing BLP subjects
On Mon, 23 May 2011 16:55:49 +0200, Peter Gervai grin...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 16:46, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote: Re the idea of informing BLP subjects that we have a biography on them. Most LPs would read such email as a request for editing, which is basically removing negative parts (regardless of its sourcing) and boosting positive parts, possibly include lots of irrelevant details. That is my _guess_, based on a specific LP I know [myself]. I fully agree. In addition, it is not clear how to identify an editor with the person the article is about, and why the person (provided he/she is identified) should have the priority in adding/removing info. Cheers Yaroslav ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native language (Milos Rancic)
On 22/05/11 18:29, WereSpielChequers wrote: We are likely to reach each of the following on the way to our target, and it would be great to announce them when we reach them: 1 90% of literate people have a version of wikipedia available in a language that they understand 2 95% of literate people have a version of wikipedia available in a language that they understand 3 99% of literate people have a version of wikipedia available in a language that they understand 4 90% of literate people have a version of wikipedia available in their native language 5 95% of literate people have a version of wikipedia available in their native language 6 99% of literate people have a version of wikipedia available in their native language WereSpielChequers This raises the interesting prospect of bringing Wikipedia to the billion or more people who are currently illiterate, as the cost of access to mobile phones and network connectivity continues to fall to the point where it is becoming available even to some of the poorest people in the world, regardless of literacy. (Consider, for example, the reported increases in literacy in some parts of Africa as people learn literacy skills simply to be able to SMS their friends and use Facebook.) As part of the WMF's mission, I wonder if it could be worth considering providing a Web-based English (or other language) literacy course that could start with very simple video lessons to give an elementary vocabulary first, and then allow the user to slowly bootstrap their language sophistication from there? Although this would be a massive job to create, once the mission was put in place, many people might be willing to crowdsource the needed content. -- Neil ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Interesting legal action
Regarding the original point about superinjunctions, an MP has named Ryan Giggs in the House of Commons and this is being widely reported in the British media. The superinjunction will be gone by the end of the afternoon. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Video-MP-Names-Footballer-At-Centre-Of-Gagging-Order-In-House-Of-Commons/Article/201105415997439?lpos=UK_News_Carousel_Region_1lid=ARTICLE_15997439_Video%3A_MP_Names_Footballer_At_Centre_Of_Gagging_Order_In_House_Of_Commons ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
Hello, I am even more pessimistic. Of course, Wikipedia exits in many languages, but many Wikipedia language versions are still quite small and of low quality, typical encyclopedias-to-become, but still no really useful encyclopedias by now. Kind regards Ziko 2011/5/23 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com: On 05/23/2011 03:04 PM, M. Williamson wrote: When words are from the same root, the same character is generally used regardless of modern pronunciation. In Traditional Chinese, phonetic elements are mostly based on older pronunciations which might not make sense in all modern Sinitic languages; sometimes in Simplified Chinese these are replaced by phonetic elements based on Mandarin pronunciation. However, Milos, I believe you have misinterpreted logophonetic here. Although the script has phonetic elements, this does not mean that the phonetic elements are based on modern pronunciations. So for example, 西瓜 is the word for watermelon in every Sinitic language (as far as I'm aware). In Mandarin it is pronounced xi gua; in Cantonese it is sai gwaa, in Min Nan it is sai koe, in Shanghainese Wu it is si kwo (I have not noted tones here due to different tone systems in these languages). In spite of differing words, since they are all from the same etymological root, they are all written exactly the same way with the same characters. This is probably not the best example since neither of these characters has a phonetic element, but that is irrelevant because even if they did the case would be the same. What DOES make Sinitic (Chinese) languages different when written is the following (*this is important*): Words that are not etymologically related to the equivalent in other Sinitic languages are often/usually written differently; grammar and syntax can be different (as an example, in Shanghai Wu you can say We drink coffee as Ala kafi che which is literally We coffee drink; in Mandarin it would be said as Women he kafei, literally We drink coffee, notice the different word order), including grammatical particles which have no direct equivalent. Imagine for a moment that English and Spanish used a similar writing system. I want you to give me a piece of bread and Quiero que me des un pedacito de pan would be written differently due to differing grammar: I want you to give me a piece of bread would be written as [I] [WANT] [YOU] [TO] [GIVE] [ME] [A] [PIECE] [OF] [BREAD] Quiero que me des un pedacito de pan would be written as [WANT]-[FIRST PERSON SINGULAR] [THAT] [TO-ME] [GIVE]-[SECOND PERSON SINGULAR SUBJUNCTIVE] [A] [PIECE]-[DIMINUTIVE] [OF] [BREAD]. Also, Cuando va a llegar Maria? (accents missing) and When is Maria going to arrive? Cuando va a llegar Maria? would be written as [WHEN] [GO]-[THIRD PERSON SINGULAR] [TO] [ARRIVE] [MARIA] When is Maria going to arrive? would be written as [WHEN] [IS] [MARIA] [GOING TO] [ARRIVE] or something like that. Note here that the arrive comes after Maria in English, but before in Spanish. These are relatively simple examples, but although in many ways English and Spanish (and many other Western European languages) have relatively similar syntax (as compared to, say, Asian, African or American languages) and are related, due to these grammar differences it would be impossible to unify them in writing. It is essentially the same case with Sinitic languages. Mark, thank you very much for making things clear! However, there is another issue at play here: the classification of Sinitic languages and dialects is a bit controversial, and it is possible that some of these languages identified by the Ethnologue would not want or need a separate version. Jin Chinese, for example, is often identified as a divergent dialect of Mandarin, and I'm doubtful that a Wikipedia written in Jin in Chinese characters would differ substantially from zh.wp, and almost certain (though I am willing to be proven wrong) that they would not differ enough in writing to merit separate Wikipedias. ... I would ask you personally (but, others, too) to give your opinions toward as many as possible missing languages inside of notes sections at [1] or inside newly created articles inside of the namespace of that page (let's say, [[Missing Wikipedias/Spoken Arabic varieties]]). Such additions would be very valuable: if there are people who don't need Wikimedia projects editions, we can spend our resources on those who need. Macrolanguage editions of Wikimedia projects are not anymore taboo. If it is more reasonable to use one project for a number of closely related languages *and* communities want that, there is no reason why not to allow that. [1] http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Missing_Wikipedias ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- Ziko van Dijk The Netherlands
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native language
More data. This is about all living languages, just to get a clue about what is reasonable to do and what is not. Number of languages and number of speakers for languages categorized by number of speakers (you can get more nice wikitable at [1]): category: number of languages, total number of speakers 100M+: 17, 2514548848 10M-99M: 78, 2376900757 1M-9M: 303, 950166458 100k-999k: 900, 284119716 10k-99k: 1837, 61223297 1k-9k: 2025, 7823891 100-999: 1039, 460911 10-99: 343, 12664 1-9: 134, 528 all: 6677, 6195257070 [1] http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Missing_Wikipedias/Languages_and_numbers ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Interesting legal action
Regarding the original point about superinjunctions, an MP has named Ryan Giggs in the House of Commons and this is being widely reported in the British media. The superinjunction will be gone by the end of the afternoon. Yet, this remains true: The judge said: It has never been suggested, of course, that there is any legitimate public interest, in the traditional sense, in publishing this information. Fred ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native language
Clearly, at least at this point, it is probably unreasonable to target any languages with less than 100,000 native speakers; of course, if there is community interest I think they should get Wikipedias, but the 70 million or so human beings who speak languages with less than 100k speakers are likely to be either 1) fluent in a language with more speakers or 2) live in such isolation that it is unlikely they would use Wikipedia, at least at this point in time. 2011/5/23 Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com: More data. This is about all living languages, just to get a clue about what is reasonable to do and what is not. Number of languages and number of speakers for languages categorized by number of speakers (you can get more nice wikitable at [1]): category: number of languages, total number of speakers 100M+: 17, 2514548848 10M-99M: 78, 2376900757 1M-9M: 303, 950166458 100k-999k: 900, 284119716 10k-99k: 1837, 61223297 1k-9k: 2025, 7823891 100-999: 1039, 460911 10-99: 343, 12664 1-9: 134, 528 all: 6677, 6195257070 [1] http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Missing_Wikipedias/Languages_and_numbers ___ 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] 1.3 billion of humans don't have Wikipedia in their native...
An'n 23.05.2011 17:37, hett Ziko van Dijk schreven: I am even more pessimistic. Of course, Wikipedia exits in many languages, but many Wikipedia language versions are still quite small and of low quality, typical encyclopedias-to-become, but still no really useful encyclopedias by now. If we consider the extent of old pre-internet paper encyclopedias as the threshold between encyclopedia-to-become and encyclopedia and if we don't aim at the top-tier encyclopedias, but at the middle-tier which was not as complete as the top-tier works but affordable, we are at about 150,000 entries, I guess. From my experience at the German Wikipedia it was at about 200,000 articles when the last articles were created where I had the feeling that no serious encyclopedia could do without them. For a naturally grown and not bot-fueled Wikipedia that should roughly be the number of articles to become indeed useful ... in coverage of topics relevant to the readers, quality is another issue. But I guess the quality of the Wikipedias is better than the quality of the big Wikipedias back then when they were the same size, because the smaller Wikipedias nowadays can draw from the bigger Wikipedias, an sourced information pool that was not available before. Looking at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias we have 17 Wikipedias that have more than 200,000 articles. Among them none that haven't had encyclopedias before the internet age. Actually there are no languages anywhere in the top group where we could really prove our mission of bringing knowledge to people who before had no chance to obtain it in their native languages. All of them are either strong languages that have supporting national states and had decent encyclopedias before or they are bot fueled (Esperanto is neither, but it's also no language to reach people unreached by education). Galician with 71,000 articles is the first language that has no strong supporting state/territory and is not mainly build by bots, where we serve an outstanding service to the language community. But they are of course reached by Spanish/Portuguese education. Telugu with almost 48,000 articles seems to be the biggest wikipedia in a language where we serve the language community with things that wouldn't exist otherwise. Yes, I think we are far away from being a useful and important encyclopedia except for the national languages of the first and second world. Marcus Buck ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Scheduled intermittent downtime on all Wikimedia projects on May 24
Dear all, The Wikimedia Foundation will be performing network maintenance on Tuesday, May 24 between 13:00 and 14:00 (UTC) (see other timezones on timeanddate.com: http://ur1.ca/49cl2 ). During the maintenance period, you may experience intermittent connection issues to Wikimedia Foundation websites, including wikipedia.org. We have been experiencing router networking issues (and as a direct result, latency issues) since last week. After much investigation, and temporary fixes, the Operations team decided to update the router software and tune the configuration. We apologize for the inconvenience. -- Guillaume Paumier ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] IRC office hours with Sue Gardner, this Thursday at 17:00 UTC
Hi everyone, Just wanted to give some prior notice that this Thursday at 17:00 UTC there will be an office hours in #wikimedia-office on freenode. Local time conversion and other links are in the usual place on Meta.[1] A topic has not yet been set, so watch the wiki page if you're interested and feel free to propose something. Thanks for reading, -- Steven Walling Fellow at Wikimedia Foundation wikimediafoundation.org 1. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] The Signpost – Volume 7, Issue 21 – 23 May 2011
News and notes: GLAM workshop; legal policies; brief news http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-05-23/News_and_notes In the news: Death of the expert?; superinjunctions saga continues; World Heritage status petitioned and debated; brief news http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-05-23/In_the_news WikiProject report: WikiProject Formula One http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-05-23/WikiProject_report Featured content: The best of the week http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-05-23/Featured_content Arbitration report: Injunction – preliminary protection levels for BLP articles when removing PC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-05-23/Arbitration_report Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-05-23/Technology_report Single page view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost/Single PDF version http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Wikipedia_Signpost/2011-05-23 http://identi.ca/wikisignpost / https://twitter.com/wikisignpost -- Wikipedia Signpost Staff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] CentralNotice use
On Sun, May 22, 2011 at 2:48 AM, church.of.emacs.ml church.of.emacs...@googlemail.com wrote: Are there any devs on your proposal? Or is development planned in this area? (If these are two noes, it might be an idea for WMDE's community project budget) I hope we can get some of the annoy-me-not stuff with CentralNotice fixed during the sprints leading up to the fundraiser, but beyond that, there's not yet a dedicated project to build better messaging/broadcasting tools. So if it's a possibility for WMDE (or another chapter/group/individual) to take this on, that would be great. -- 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
