Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 6:45 AM, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote: I want to ask you something else. It's been suggested several times at various places that the present resolution is justified as a compromise to prevent a considerably more repressive form of censorship. This implies that the proposed image hiding feature is a less repressive form of censorship. I do not see the proposed feature as censorship - all the images remain on the site. Nothing is removed. Nothing is suppressed. Everything remains. [1] I am however going to ask whether the fact that such proposals were entertained, shows the validity of the argument that we're on a slippery slope. Are we truly on a slippery slope with 'informative labelling' with neutral language? Or can this be considered another aspect of curation? Once you admit censorship, it's hard to limit it; once you admit POV editing, it inevitable develops into arrant promotionalism. Censorship is inherently POV editing. Are we really admitting censorship via the front or even through the back door through the image hiding feature? If everything remains on the site, and you and I can continue to see everything that exists just as we do today, how are we 'admitting censorship'? I have read the comments on meta, about the possibility of this opening doors to government requests for removal of content - that, in my view would be censorship. The Board resolution affirms that Wikimedia projects are not censored. [2] Cheers Bishakha [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship [2] http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Controversial_content ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people
On 26 August 2011 08:55, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: Are we truly on a slippery slope with 'informative labelling' with neutral language? Or can this be considered another aspect of curation? We have a category system. Modulo idiots (the danger of a wiki is that people can edit it), it mostly works. How neutral can a block any image in these categories system be? - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] How to free something from Wikipedia in the public domain?
Hi, I was wondering if there is any way to officially free Wikipedia content under PD/CC-0? What procedure should one follow to use that data on another website with an incompatible license? Assumptions: we are talking about a single version of the page with only one or just a few authors, and all authors have accepted to release the data in the public domain. Possible answers I have considered: - a message from each author in the talk page of the article (pros: easy to implement, wiki-based; cons: language barrier) - a message to OTRS (cons: afaik, OTRS messages to WMF are only considered official by the WMF itself) Thanks, Strainu ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] How to free something from Wikipedia in the public domain?
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:15, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote: I was wondering if there is any way to officially free Wikipedia content under PD/CC-0? What procedure should one follow to use that data on another website with an incompatible license? Assumptions: we are talking about a single version of the page with only one or just a few authors, and all authors have accepted to release the data in the public domain. Possible answers I have considered: - a message from each author in the talk page of the article (pros: easy to implement, wiki-based; cons: language barrier) That seems the most sensible way. It's not an OTRS issue. -- Tom Morris http://tommorris.org/ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] How to free something from Wikipedia in the public domain?
On 26 August 2011 12:15, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I was wondering if there is any way to officially free Wikipedia content under PD/CC-0? What procedure should one follow to use that data on another website with an incompatible license? Assumptions: we are talking about a single version of the page with only one or just a few authors, and all authors have accepted to release the data in the public domain. Possible answers I have considered: - a message from each author in the talk page of the article (pros: easy to implement, wiki-based; cons: language barrier) - a message to OTRS (cons: afaik, OTRS messages to WMF are only considered official by the WMF itself) I don't see why it should have anything to do with Wikipedia. You are dealing with the copyright holders directly. The fact that the same content happens to be used on Wikipedia under license is irrelevant. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Wikilovesmonuments
Til dine oplysninger: www.wikilovesmonuments.com :-st ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikilovesmonuments
Isn't the official site is http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu? Also, some chapters have their own. It's not a commercial event, so I don't think the participants run that .com site. My apologies, if I am wrong. 2011/8/26 billy joel billyonl...@hotmail.nl Til dine oplysninger: www.wikilovesmonuments.com :-st ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l -- Tanvir Rahman Wikitanvir on Wikimedia ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikilovesmonuments
Yes, I understood that. But I think its kind of stupid that the foundation didn't buy the .com domain and that it was possible to hijack it... ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] How to free something from Wikipedia in the public domain?
Sounds a little problematic depending on the details. If the text was released on Wikipedia first, then the contributors agreed to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. If the all the authors of the article can identify themselves as the same people who contributed under the named accounts for the original Wikipedia article then release to PD is no problem, in practice few articles only have a history of contributors who are using accounts associated with their legal identities. Cheers, Fae -- http://enwp.org/user_talk:fae Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/faetags ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 10:15:48AM +0100, David Gerard wrote: On 26 August 2011 08:55, Bishakha Datta bishakhada...@gmail.com wrote: Are we truly on a slippery slope with 'informative labelling' with neutral language? Or can this be considered another aspect of curation? We have a category system. Modulo idiots (the danger of a wiki is that people can edit it), it mostly works. How neutral can a block any image in these categories system be? In that scenario: On day 1, the system, and categories, will be entirely neutral. However the categories that are blessed (cursed) by the image-hiding system are now potentially non-neutral. Due to the way wikis work: by day ~365, the categories will very likely be non-neutral in practice. We'll then be in the same situation as if we had started out with non-neutral categories in the first place (verboten). sincerely, Kim Bruning -- [Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment] gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key FEF9DD72 5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A 01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 01:25:32PM +0530, Bishakha Datta wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 6:45 AM, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote: I want to ask you something else. It's been suggested several times at various places that the present resolution is justified as a compromise to prevent a considerably more repressive form of censorship. This implies that the proposed image hiding feature is a less repressive form of censorship. I do not see the proposed feature as censorship - all the images remain on the site. Nothing is removed. Nothing is suppressed. Everything remains. The image hiding feature itself is not a form of censorship, as far as I'm aware of. The data used to feed the image hiding feature can be classified as a censorship tool (Source: ALA... Read The Fine Thread for details). Even if we *never* build the image hider itself, but just prepare special categories for it, we would be participating in (stages of) censorship. sincerely, Kim Bruning -- [Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment] gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key FEF9DD72 5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A 01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] How to free something from Wikipedia in the public domain?
On 26 August 2011 12:37, Fae fae...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds a little problematic depending on the details. If the text was released on Wikipedia first, then the contributors agreed to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. If the all the authors of the article can identify themselves as the same people who contributed under the named accounts for the original Wikipedia article then release to PD is no problem, in practice few articles only have a history of contributors who are using accounts associated with their legal identities. Legal identity is a bit tangential here, I think; if we accept a pseudonymous account as good enough to release the content under CC licenses to begin with, then all you'd need for relicensing would be for those same accounts to agree to it. -- - Andrew Gray andrew.g...@dunelm.org.uk ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikilovesmonuments
is not a WMF event. And all of the sites have the country code in the end. _ *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 http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Nossos_projetos.* On 26 August 2011 12:34, billy joel billyonl...@hotmail.nl wrote: Yes, I understood that. But I think its kind of stupid that the foundation didn't buy the .com domain and that it was possible to hijack it... ___ 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] Wikilovesmonuments
Hi billy, thanks for your attention. Wiki Loves Monuments is being organized by several chapters in over 15 countries in Europe. The main page for that is indeed www.wikilovesmonuments.eu . The Wikimedia Foundation is not involved in organizing the events, nor is it responsible for its websites - this is one of the projects run by chapters. Unfortunately, it is not affordable to register every possible domain which might be hijacked. We were aware that there would be a risk for that, and that potentially, this could be organized in even many more countries. We did choose to register wikilovesmonuments.org (registered by WMDE) but didn't register the .com - we had to draw a line somewhere. For a possible intercontinental contest, we would have to rely on the .org domain. Lodewijk 2011/8/26 billy joel billyonl...@hotmail.nl Yes, I understood that. But I think its kind of stupid that the foundation didn't buy the .com domain and that it was possible to hijack it... ___ 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] How to free something from Wikipedia in the public domain?
I don't think the problem will be whether the contributors edited in accounts associated with their legal identities, I think the problem will be whether all the editors (or their heirs) are contactable. Much of the pedia has been written by IP editors. IPs may be edited by multiple people and by different people over time. So even if the IP address in question is still active and agrees to the release into Public domain of something contributed by that IP address three years ago, there is a real possibility that the person currently editing at that IP address is not the same as the one whose copyright they are willing to give away. With logged in accounts you are on much firmer ground, if you post on the talkpage of a contributor and they agree to waive their rights on an article then you don't need to know who they are, but you can be pretty confident that they are the same person as was editing that account when it contributed to that article. But a significant proportion of our editors are no longer with us and may not even be monitoring their talkpage or the Email account they used for Wikipedia, and 30% don't even have email enabled. A few have scrambled their passwords, or been blocked and had their talkpage access revoked. Some are dead. But if you can be patient, in the long run it may be possible to assume that all editors involved have been dead for more than seventy years. Though with some of our editors being as young as 8 that could be quite a while. It might be easier to persuade whatever the organisation it is that insists on PD to broaden their stance and become compatible with us. Regards WereSpielChequers -- Message: 10 Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 12:37:08 +0100 From: Fae fae...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] How to free something from Wikipedia in the public domain? To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: CAHRYMYXuCzOV5qH3AJ43B2ex6w1AvwGo_cn10=ezf+9lnq-...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sounds a little problematic depending on the details. If the text was released on Wikipedia first, then the contributors agreed to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. If the all the authors of the article can identify themselves as the same people who contributed under the named accounts for the original Wikipedia article then release to PD is no problem, in practice few articles only have a history of contributors who are using accounts associated with their legal identities. Cheers, Fae -- ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people
I think there are definitely some neutral criteria which might be applicable. And maybe there are some criteria which are harder to neutralize (yeah, i know - has a different meaning :) ) Take for example nudity. It should be possible to create a category Images that show a vagina, images that show a penis which can even be subcategorized into (...) as main topic of the picture or (...) as detail of the picture. It will require some work and thinking by neutrality thinkers like you, but it should be possible. And I'm confident that you and the likes of you will stay close on the topic to help us remember that we should make it as objective as possible. The next step is that someone can use these neutral categories to choose what he/she wants or does not want to see. For example, maybe someone has a fear of elevators, so that person can hide all images in the category images that show an elevator. Violence is definitely a topic harder to define objectively - but I'm confident we'll find a way to do that. If people have problems with that, we shouldn't change the categories (we could add more), but they should change their filter, and choose other categories to hide/show. The only truely non-neutral part could be where we suggest which categories someone might want to hide. Or packages of categories. Lodewijk 2011/8/26 Kim Bruning k...@bruning.xs4all.nl On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 01:25:32PM +0530, Bishakha Datta wrote: On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 6:45 AM, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote: I want to ask you something else. It's been suggested several times at various places that the present resolution is justified as a compromise to prevent a considerably more repressive form of censorship. This implies that the proposed image hiding feature is a less repressive form of censorship. I do not see the proposed feature as censorship - all the images remain on the site. Nothing is removed. Nothing is suppressed. Everything remains. The image hiding feature itself is not a form of censorship, as far as I'm aware of. The data used to feed the image hiding feature can be classified as a censorship tool (Source: ALA... Read The Fine Thread for details). Even if we *never* build the image hider itself, but just prepare special categories for it, we would be participating in (stages of) censorship. sincerely, Kim Bruning -- [Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment] gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key FEF9DD72 5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A 01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72 ___ 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] How to free something from Wikipedia in the public domain?
2011/8/26 Strainu strain...@gmail.com: Assumptions: we are talking about a single version of the page with only one or just a few authors, and all authors have accepted to release the data in the public domain. As I said before, I am targeting only a very specific subset of pages, where contacting the authors won't be a problem. 2011/8/26 WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com: It might be easier to persuade whatever the organisation it is that insists on PD to broaden their stance and become compatible with us. Actually, this is about handling the import of Wiki Loves Monuments data in OSM. Kolossos raised this on a OSM list: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-license-for-quot-Wiki-Loves-Monuments-quot-td6363317.html OSM is currently trying to get away from CCBYSA. :) I'm inssiting on PD instead of ODBL because I find it easier to explain the concept to the other contributors that send them to read the text of yet another license. 2011/8/26 Fae fae...@gmail.com: Sounds a little problematic depending on the details. If the text was released on Wikipedia first, then the contributors agreed to release your contribution under the CC-BY-SA 3.0 License. If the all the authors of the article can identify themselves as the same people who contributed under the named accounts for the original Wikipedia article then release to PD is no problem, in practice few articles only have a history of contributors who are using accounts associated with their legal identities. That's precisely why I asked the question. The WMF have a procedure for that, but other entities don't (or I'm not aware of it). Strainu ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people
If this should succeed I shall work as I do now, in other areas. I want to add content and keep out spam, not to dispute whether , for example, the images that show a human penis should include ones where the anatomical details are blurred, or only the outline visible. There is no point in discussing the details of censorship with censors; there is point is discussing the concept of censorship with the people who are inclined to support it. Labeling designed to accomodate censorship is censorship, as Kim says. This labeling is proposed to be done on the basis not of the regular commons categories, but of special ones designed for the purpose; not on the regular WP editors, but a special committee. (There is a valid argument that the present manner of categorizing images needs some major improvements) As Lodewiijk says, anyone who wants to make use of these categories -for any purpose, is free to do so outside WP. f they want to design a filter imposed on access to WP using them, they are free to do so. If they want to use their own categories for this, they are free to do so. If they want to use computer image analysis for this, they are free to do so;, I personally consider these at best unproductive things to do, but anyone else is free to think act otherwise. The key question remains. ''Why on wikipedia'' when it even gives the appearance of being opposed to our principles. As fr the slippery slope, Kim gives one way it can happen.There are others, which I think are pretty obvious to those who would support them. It would take very little to change the wording or appearance on the button to make it more obtrusive, or to initially hide the image. It would be easily possible to have the hide preference panel set to hide particular classes of images unless changed, instead of being blank. It would take the flip of a single bit to change the default to hide, whether for anon users, or everyone. It wouldn't be that hard to make changing the default for some classes of images a two-step process, with the second being are you sure? , or even are you of legal age in your jurisdiction?. All of these steps are under the control of the people who imposed the system in the first place. This is why I asked the question, what more drastic proposals are being supported. at the board? The very fact that they were suggested at the board level implies there are some there who would do these things, and proves the slippery slope argument to be real. . Eventually we may not have someone as sensible as phoebe to stop them (and the others who feel this way. (but as they are not commenting it is not appropriate to not name them--I give them my apologies.) . Now, if I am wrong, and there were not any more drastic alternatives considered, I will need to retract this--but it was described as a compromise. -- 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] Board resolutions on controversial content and images of identifiable people
On 26 August 2011 16:06, David Goodman dgge...@gmail.com wrote: This labeling is proposed to be done on the basis not of the regular commons categories, but of special ones designed for the purpose; not on the regular WP editors, but a special committee. Ooh, *really*. Then this initiative will be bitterly resisted at every turn. - d. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Wikimedia Hungary Report for April 2011
Hi Asaf, At this point it is mostly a declaration of intent to cooperate. Arcanum digitises content under various copyright regimes (some are already under public domain, some they only digitise without any rights in the work, for some they receive a fixed duration permission to use), and they agreed to give us stuff that is under PD if/when we ask for it (some of it might have made its way already to Wikipedia/Wikisource randomly, especially as some of the content digitised by Arcanum is available through the Hungarian Electronic Library or their own website, and some can be bought in the (book)shops). So far we haven't asked for any specific content, but the possibility is still open. Arcanum (http://arcanum.hu/idegennyelvu/iny_index.html) has a fascinating wealth of content, some of it available on the internet (not all of it in Hungarian), so I hope we can find the pieces in there that would be most useful for a 21st century encyclopedia and request the data. If you have any wishlist, you might help us in making this partnership more successful. Best regards, Bence On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi, Bence. Could you say a little more about the partnership with Arcanum? Thanks, Asaf On Thu, Aug 18, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Bence Damokos bence.damo...@wiki.media.huwrote: Dear all, Please find below the report on Wikimedia Hungary's activities in April 2011. It is available online at: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Reports/Wikim%C3%A9dia_Magyarorsz%C3%A1g/April_2011 . Best regards, -- Bence Damokos Executive Vice President, Wikimedia Hungary http://wikimedia.hu http://wiki.media.hu *Wikimedia Hungary Report* *Vol 4 Issue 4* *April 2011* *Prepared by: Bence Damokos* This is an update on Wikimédia Magyarország's activities covering April 2011. For more recent updates, you can follow our blog (in Hungarian) at http://blog.wikimedia.hu Presentations In the month of April, we have held presentations about Wikipedia on the following occasions: - 8: A presentation at the the Apáczai High School in Budapest - 13: A presentation at the Humanities Faculty of the St Stephen University in Jászberény. The audience included students of library studies. - 26: A presentation at the Budapest University of Technology and Economics Partnerships - We have discussed collaboration opportunities with Arcanum, a publisher of digitised versions of out-of-copyright books, encyclopedias, maps and similar. In this spirit we have signed a partnership agreement with the publisher at the XVIII. International Book Fair of Budapest. (Press release: http://wikimedia.hu/wiki/Egy%C3%BCttm%C5%B1k%C3%B6d%C3%A9si_meg%C3%A1llapod%C3%A1s_az_Arcanum_Adatb%C3%A1zis_Kiad%C3%B3val ) - We have also had a meeting with the researchers at the Hungarian Academy of Science (MTA-SZTAKI institute) about the possibility of using their anti-plagiarism software to detect copyright violations on Wikipedia. Grants - We have submitted a report ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:WM_HU/Wikiconference/Report ) on our 10th anniversary conference held in January. Videos of the event are available on our YouTube channel at: http://youtube.com/WikimediaHU. - Also, we have submitted a report on the 4.3 million forint ($22000) grant we have received from the Hungarian Council of Internet Providers to buy a server (see previous coverage in August 2010: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Reports/Wikim%C3%A9dia_Magyarorsz%C3%A1g/August_2010#Council_of_Hungarian_Internet_Providers ) - In April we have received notification that our 0.25 million forint ($1250) grant request for the National Civil Fund was approved. The grant, covering June to September 2011 is intended to cover the costs of the development of a CiviCRM credit card gateway and the printing of outreach publications. Wikisprint http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Herbert_Marshall_McLuhan_drawing.jpg http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Herbert_Marshall_McLuhan_drawing.jpg Marshall McLuhan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_McLuhan A group called Kitchen Budapest has organized a Wikipedia editing sprint at Műcsarnok, one of the biggest art exhibition halls in Budapest to celebrate the 100th anniversary of Marshall McLuhan's birthday. As part of the sprint, they created and improved the McLuhan article in the Hungarian Wikipedia. A short video and a description of the event is available in English at: http://mcluhan100.kibu.hu/wikisprint/?lang=en Meetings On 4th April we held a board meeting in a Budapest café to discuss pending projects, approve new members, the transfer of our share of the Wikimedia Fundraiser (see previous report) and similar. The
[Foundation-l] Nudge. Re: Wikimania 2011 video on Commons?
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 09:40:45AM +0800, Waihorace wrote: Dear all, ? Are the Wikimania 2011 video on YouTube aviliable on Wikimedia Commons? Where is the link? Thanks. ? HW@zhwp So far we have: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Videos_of_Wikimania_in_Haifa and http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=WikimediaIL#grid/uploads Both are so far incomplete. Consider this a nudge! sincerely, Kim Bruning -- [Non-pgp mail clients may show pgp-signature as attachment] gpg (www.gnupg.org) Fingerprint for key FEF9DD72 5ED6 E215 73EE AD84 E03A 01C5 94AC 7B0E FEF9 DD72 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] [libraries] Open Access EU consultation
[sorry for cross-posting] I wanted to remind you all that the deadline of the European consultation on Open Access and Open Data is September 9th. Here's the link: http://ec.europa.eu/research/consultations/scientific_information/consultation_en.htm and here's the survey on Meta: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RCom/OA/EU Daniel is working on that, but feedback could be useful. Here my few cents about some proposals we could make in the comment sections ofthe survey: 1. We need strategies/policies for OA. We need institutions/university to *require* OAfrom doctoral students and researchers. 2. We need digital preservation to be done by libraries and archives, not publishers. They have right now the functions and services (access, dissemination, preservation) that should be accomplished by libraries. Preservation is an issue. 3. We need clear, easily understandable licenses. CC-BY for articles and CC-0 for research data should do their job. No more ad hoc, human-not-understandable licenses, but clear Creative Commons. (CC-BY= we can use that on Wikipedia, we can upload it on Commons, we can publish it on Wikisource, we have material for Wikibooks/Wikiversity, etc.) I hope this can be useful. Aubrey 2011/7/28 Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com: Thank you Daniel, great work. Lodewijk was suggesting that we reply as an organization, because they don't really count single citizens proposals. If we manage to write something, we could then forward it many times, one per chapter, in several languages :-) But first things first, we need to work on the draft. Aubrey 2011/7/28 Daniel Mietchen daniel.mietc...@googlemail.com: Problem solved; full text now on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RCom/OA/EU . Daniel On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Daniel Mietchen daniel.mietc...@googlemail.com wrote: Hi Aubrey, thanks for the invitation. I had indeed planned to set up a document to facilitate collaborative drafting of a response. So far, I have seen the Open Knowledge Foundation, the Euroscience Working Group on Open Access as well as Eurodoc signaling an interest in drafting a response, and doing it all together - perhaps with an individual comment per organization - could be worth a try. The questionnaire comes in three variants - for citizens, organisations and public bodies - and the session to fill it in is time-limited, so we will have to set up an editable copy somewhere. The Commission provided a PDF ( http://ec.europa.eu/research/consultations/scientific_information/questionnaire.pdf ) whose text cannot be copied, and I inquired with them on July 16 to provide another version of the file. My submission was forwarded to the technical unit two days later but no reaction since - I just dropped them a line again. To get things started, I just set up http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/RCom/OA/EU . Please chime in there. Thanks and cheers, Daniel On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 11:49 AM, Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all. Lodewijk today forwarded me this interesting EU consultation about open access, open data and digital preservation for scientific information. Press release: http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/890 Consultation: http://ec.europa.eu/research/consultations/scientific_information/consultation_en.htm It could be very, very interesting if we (as Wikimedia Movement, or Wikimedia chapters) could write a statement to contribute. Maybe our brand-new Open Access WMF fellow could be interested in coordinating :-D Anyway, it seems a good opportunity to put in (digital) paper what we think about these issues. Any thoughts? We have until September 9th. Aubrey ___ Libraries mailing list librar...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries ___ Libraries mailing list librar...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Chapters
Hi Jimmy, There are several side effects to the idea of not allowing chapters at all to fundraise (I note that boardmembers and staff members have a different take on this, so I'll keep it general - keeping in mind there are many other aspects to be considered, such as transparancy. However, imho fundraising through chapters should remain the best way). * Having one organization spreading around money is going to lead, sooner or later, to that organization solely making decisions on what is important and what is not. Centralized decision making, centralized prioritising. * Forcing chapters to abide the WMF cyclus is centralization - an efficient grant system likely includes fixed moments to ask for grants. Many chapters currently still have a lot of flexibility to try out programs. If we would not have had such flexibility, we would not have had Wiki Loves Monuments for example - a lot of the budget part happened late in the execution because 95% happens with volunteers. * Asking grants automatically means language issues. Chapters not having English as a mother tongue, *will* be more hesistant, no matter what help you put in place. It will be a big effort, because more bottle necks (English speakers) are introduced. * Asking for external grants is much harder - many Dutch grant organizations for example have a requirement that maximum x% of your budget can come from grants (For example, Mondriaanstichting has a maximum of 40% grant money). If we are forced to grant request to the foundation, that cuts off that income source too. * Not giving chapters access to donor data has many side effects - because they will no longer be the organization responsible for communicating with them. Sure, they would need to be responsible in that too, but denying them access also means they cannot communicate their activities at the same time, and get more volunteers involved from externally. Maybe centralization is not your goal, but it is what you are doing. Having a non-grant funding just makes an organization more independent, and makes it more flexible and responsible. That organization is more likely to develop itself professionally. That does not leave out that there are many problems with the current distribution system (50/50 etc) but that is a whole other discussion. Lodewijk 2011/8/11 Jimmy Wales jwa...@wikia-inc.com On 8/10/11 8:51 PM, birgitte...@yahoo.com wrote: I don't think chapters are being cut off I think they are being centralized. Centralization, not lack of funding, is what I believe will make chapters ineffective. Chapters are not being centralized. I don't know how I can be more clear. The idea that the only thing that can make chapters really decentralized is the very narrow question of who actually processes the donation is mistaken. --Jimbo ___ 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] Chapters
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 3:44 PM, Lodewijk lodew...@effeietsanders.org wrote: Hi Jimmy, There are several side effects to the idea of not allowing chapters at all to fundraise (I note that boardmembers and staff members have a different take on this, so I'll keep it general - keeping in mind there are many other aspects to be considered, such as transparancy. However, imho fundraising through chapters should remain the best way). Lodewijk, I don't think the chapters are barred from all fundraising... At most, they are at risk of not being able to participate in the global WMF fundraiser. They can still raise funds on their own through other methods. Maybe such other methods are more time consuming, difficult and less lucrative... But there are innovative substitutes for the WMF annual fundraiser, I'm sure. In any case, the barriers to participation relate to the organizational capacity of the chapters and the associated risks. A chapter that has financial controls and active leadership should be able to meet the WMFs requirements (with the exception of tax deduction eligibility, based on jurisdiction); a chapter that does not puts both their funds and their public reputation at risk. As the host of the fundraiser and the mark owner, the WMF shares in that risk - and it is both reasonable and necessary that the Foundation adhere to and require minimum standards of accountability in order to mitigate the risk of fraud, waste and abuse. If it were only the chapters themselves at stake (as is the case when they raise funds independently), then they could get money first and organization second. But the WMF shares in the risk, and is offering organizational support to chapters, so cart before horse does not make sense. Nathan ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Minutes after Virginia earthquake, it was on Wikipedia (Washington Post)
Always nice to see fellow Wikipedians featured in major news media :) http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/minutes-after-virginia-earthquake-it-was-on-wikipedia/2011/08/24/gIQAQqQMcJ_story.html (And I'm from DC and Indianapolis, so, even better!) -- GLAMWIKI Partnership Ambassador for the Wikimedia Foundationhttp://www.glamwiki.org Wikipedian-in-Residence, Archives of American Arthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SarahStierch and Sarah Stierch Consulting *Historical, cultural artistic research advising.* -- http://www.sarahstierch.com/ ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
