[Foundation-l] Is Wiktionary copyright?
Is the term Wiktionary copyrighted? I only ask because the OpenDemocracy website has recently started a Dictionary of Ethical Politics wikitionary http://resurgence.opendemocracy.net/index.php/Main_Page If it is copyrighted, you may want to say something to them, or else it will end up like the hoover - a generic term usable by anyone. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Wikinews has not failed
- wjhon...@aol.com wrote: ... Few to no Wikipedia articles point at Wikinews even when there is a Wikinews article. How about: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisbon_Treaty#Signing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radovan_Karad%C5%BEi%C4%87#Arrest_and_trial or indeed the nearly 3,000 other articles listed at: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Wikinewslimit=500 And I submit that no outside agency points at Wikinews articles for anything. Google News has started to link to stories in both Wikipedia and Wikinews, depending on individuals' profiles. Andrew ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Recent firing?
- Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Try to remember that the Wikimedia Foundation is a business... No it isn't - the Foundation is a charity. The Foundation needs to retain the confidence of the Wikimedia community in order to achieve its aims, and the community plays a big role in the Foundation through elected and chapter-selected board members. I'm sure it understands that. Andrew ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] 31 august, 20 years of our national holiday Our romanian language in Moldova, mo.wikipedia still in cyrillic !
A few points to add and some suggestions: - You can have a single language written in more than one script; although they are separate issues, for our purposes, given that we are predominantly written, we tend to combine both issues and look at language/script combinations. - There seem to be two language/script combinations in use today: Romanian/Moldavian, written in the Latin Script, used by 20-25m people, which according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ISO_639-1_codes has the ISO-639-1 code ro and Moldavian written in the Cyrillic script which is used by around 175,000 people in Transdniestr. - The iso code for Romanian/Moldavian is ro. mo, which was the ISO code for Moldavian in the Cyrillic script is now deprecated. There is no ISO code for Cyrillic script Moldavian. - Where ISO 639-1 codes exist we use them to name the Wikipedia. However, we do have other encyclopedias for languages which don't have ISO codes. Examples are http://ang.wikipedia.org - the Anglo Saxon encyclopedia which uses some non-latin characters (e.g. Ƿ for th) - There was a similar dispute recently about the belarusian encyclopedia. I note there are now two projects - be-x-old and be - which are both Cyrillic but looking at the language article the first rejects certain grammar reforms that took place in 1933. - There is a place to request closing down projects: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects. No proposal has yet been made on that page to close mo.wp - Why should wikipedia close down a language/script which has an active, if small, usage? Surely a better solution is to rename the project and let them continue as they are? My suggestions: - mo.wp should be moved to something other than mo - perhaps mocy? - In articles like http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias, it should be listed as Moldovan (Cyrillic) rather than just Moldovan - mo.wp should become a disambiguation page, allowing users to choose either mocy or ro. - Finally, I don't see any reason why the community can't address with this issue by discussion and consensus. There's no need for the foundation to get involved, at least at this stage. Andrew ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Frequency of Seeing Bad Versions - now with traffic data
very interesting research - many thanks for sharing that. - Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com wrote: From: Robert Rohde raro...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, 27 August, 2009 17:41:29 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: [Foundation-l] Frequency of Seeing Bad Versions - now with traffic data Recently, I reported on a simple study of how likely one was to encounter recent vandalism in Wikipedia based on selecting articles at random and using revert behavior as a proxy for recent vandalism. http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2009-August/054171.html One of the key limitations of that work was that it was looking at articles selected at random from the pool of all existing page titles. That approach was of the most immediate interest to me, but it didn't directly address the likelihood of encountering vandalism based on the way that Wikipedia is actually used because the selection of articles that people choose to visit is highly non-random. I've now redone that analysis with a crude traffic based weighting. For traffic information I used the same data stream used by http://stats.grok.se. That data is recorded hourly. For simplicity I chose 20 hours at random from the last eight months and averaged those together to get a rough picture of the relative prominence of pages. I then chose a selection of 3 articles at random with their probability of selection proportional to the traffic they received, and repeated the prior analysis previously described. (Note that this has the effect of treating the prominence of each page as a constant over time. In practice we know some pages rise to prominence while other fall down, but I am assuming the average pattern is still a good enough approximation to be useful.) From this sample I found 5,955,236 revert events in 38,096,653 edits. This is an increase of 29 times in edit frequency and 58 times the number of revert events that were found from a uniform sampling of pages. I suspect it surprises no one that highly trafficked pages are edited more often and subject to more vandalism than the average page, though it might not have been obvious that the the ratio of reverts to normal edits is also increased over more obscure pages. As before, the revert time distribution has a very long tail, though as predicted the times are generally reduced when traffic weighting is applied. In the traffic weighted sample, the median time to revert is 3.4 minutes and the mean time is 2.2 hours (compared to 6.7 minutes and 18.2 hours with uniform weighting). Again, I think it is worth acknowledging that having a majority of reverts occur within only a few minutes is a strong testament to the efficiency and dedication with which new edits are usually reviewed by the community. We could be much worse off if most things weren't caught so quickly. Unfortunately, in comparing the current analysis to the previous one, the faster response time is essentially being overwhelmed by the much larger number of vandalism occurrences. The net result is that averaged over the whole history of Wikipedia a visitor would be expected to receive a recently degraded article version during about 1.1% of requests (compared to ~0.37% in the uniform weighting estimate). The last six months averaged a slightly higher 1.3% (1 in 80 requests). As before, most of the degraded content that people are likely to actually encounter is coming from the subset of things that get by the initial monitors and survive for a long time. Among edits that are eventually reverted the longest lasting 5% of bad content (those edits taking 7.2 hours to revert) is responsible for 78% of the expected encounters with recently degraded material. One might speculate that such long-lived material is more likely to reflect subtle damage to a page rather than more obvious problems like page blanking. I did not try to investigate this. In my sample, the number of reverts being made to articles has declined ~40% since a peak in late 2006. However, the mean and median time to revert is little changed over the last two years. What little trend exists points in the direction of slightly slower responses. So to summarize, the results here are qualitatively similar to those found in the previous work. However with traffic weighting we find quantitative differences such that reverts occur much more often but take less time to be executed. The net effect of these competing factors is such that the bad content is more likely to be seen than suggested by the uniform weighting. -Robert Rohde ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Closure of projects
First, if the conclusion is that no procedure exists, a notice should be put on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects stating this so that peoples' expectations are appropriately managed. Second, is that correct? Looking at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects/Closure_of_Herero_Wikipedia it seems that there certainly was a procedure in the past where articles were shifted back into the Incubator. Most importantly, should there be a procedure? Keeping projects open is a drain on resources, such as removing vandalism. There is a level of activity below which the positive benefits of the project are outweighed by the drain, although it's clearly not worth closing a project if the effort to do this is not a worthwhile investment. Do you need particular user rights to action such requests? - Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Thursday, 20 August, 2009 19:01:39 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Closure of projects Hoi, There is no procedure because what comes closest to a consensus amount to a lot of work. Work that does not forward our mission one iota. The fact that people vote and comment is not that special, people do ... if they vote that I will wear a tutu at Wikimania and a consensus says that I should, I still have to volunteer to wear that tutu. It is the same as voting for a bug in bugzilla. The votes are not considered so why bother ? As to the language committee, it does only consider new requests for projects ... if it were to expand its services it would be in indicating what issues exist that deal with language support that would make a difference to the usability of our software. It would not be drinking from the poisoned chalice that is closing projects. The closest we came to expressing an opinion is that we would prefer the content of a to be closed project to be imported into the Incubator. This is a not good for Incubator because they get dead wood loaded into their project So all in all in my opinion it is best to leave these things as is and ignore requests for closure. Thanks, GerardM 2009/8/20 Huib! abi...@forgotten-beauty.com Hello, I noticed that there are still a lot of open request for closure on Meta so I decided to contact a LangCom member (Robin) asking him about how and when the projects will be closed or when the requests will be closed, but I recieved a answer I didn't expected. Robin told me there was no policy ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Closure_of_WMF_projects ) about the closure of projects so the request can stay open for always. I think its kind of strange that we people can make a request, that there are people who are voting and spending there time commenting on the request or even worse have stress because there project could be closed but the request will never be closed. Is there a way to change this with a new policy, or with a different com for the closure, because this seems to me a waste of time for a lot of people, people can stop editting projects just because the think the project will be closed. At this moment there are 27 request for projects to be closed, ( http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_closing_projects ) I think 50% is a easy closure for keep or close. The oldest project is from 2007 that would mean its still open after 2 years :/ -- *Huib Laurens* Web: Forgotten-beauty.com http://www.forgotten-beauty.com.com/ Email: abi...@forgotten-beauty.com mailto:abi...@forgotten-beauty.com ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] Email list archives
I hope you don't mind my raising this issue here - it's a technical issue affecting all wikimedia email lists so I thought this would be as good a place as any. When I subscribe to an email list I tend to get emails delivered, but I sometimes find it useful to view older emails on the archive. I know some people like to read all their emails on the archive, so this is also important for them. It is also useful when you have to make a publicly accessible reference to a previous post. However, the standard interface and formatting in the archives is not particularly professional or up to date. For instance, looking at a recent message I posted to the WikimediaUK list: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediauk-l/2009-August/004565.html The word wrapping is all over the shop and the formatting has all been stripped from the text. Some third party re-users do a better job, but it's still not all the way there: The Mail Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/wikimediau...@lists.wikimedia.org/msg01470.html Google Mail: http://groups.google.com/group/wmf-wikimediauk-l/browse_thread/thread/a350852f8ad2ef63 The line spacing looks funny with the first and you still lose the text formatting with the second. Has anyone got any tips about how I can either format an email to begin with or view the email afterwards to solve this problem? Secondly, has this technology been developed recently? Seems it needs a bit of investment, or alternatively, we need to move over to a better third party platform like, perhaps, Yahoo Groups. Regards, Andrew ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Email list archives
Tim Landscheidt t...@tim-landscheidt.de wrote: Andrew Turvey andrewrtur...@googlemail.com wrote: [...] Has anyone got any tips about how I can either format an email to begin with or view the email afterwards to solve this problem? Every at most 72 characters, hit the key known as [Enter]. Before sending the mail, read it. Reads fine in my mail programme - it automatically word wraps. Expecting users to manually word wrap their own emails doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Secondly, has this technology been developed recently? Seems it needs a bit of investment, or alternatively, we need to move over to a better third party platform like, perhaps, Yahoo Groups. No, reading has been known to man for some millennia... I meant the technology used to run the Wikimedia email lists, as I'm sure you realised! Andrew ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] GLAM-WIKI report
- Mathias Schindler mathias.schind...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Tim Starlingtstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote: There is a need for bulk upload tools to be better advertised and more readily accessible. One of the institutions reported paying students to upload hundreds of photos to commons via the usual web-based UI, but found it to be too time-consuming and expensive to consider on a large scale. There is an upcoming tool from the usual suspects at Wikimedia that might be of interest to you and the GLAM people. Look forward to this? Do you know what the expected time line is and where we can get more information? Thanks ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Election Results
My first response is that's probably a reflection of the voting system. When you have a non-partisan system like this, there are no clear political pro/con reasons to vote for/against particular candidates and the anti-incumbency factor doesn't really work. Candidates are likely to be successful if they're well known, and that will give an advantage to more established editors. However, you might be over-stating this conclusion. All three retiring candidates stood again and only two were re-elected - Domas Mituzas lost out to sj. - Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote: From: Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 12 August, 2009 20:07:00 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Election Results While I personally am very pleased with the results, I wonder how the election results will be perceived outside Wikimedia. With numerous media outlets reacting to PARC's research about the state of the community, I fear this endorsement of seemingly old guard Wikimedians as our Board representation will support claims about the community becoming unfriendly to new participants. Thoughts? Am I being too nervous, or do others see that potential too? If I'm not alone, perhaps any official announcement about the elections (i.e. on the Wikimedia blog and in press releases) should address this, even if only tacitly. Steven Walling On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 2:47 PM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: The Wikimedia Foundation's Board Election Committee has concluded the board selection process, and is pleased to announce that the candidates ranked as follows: Final ranking 1 Ting Chen (Wing) 2 Kat Walsh (mindspillage) 3 Samuel Klein (Sj) 4 Gerard Meijssen (GerardM) 5 Domas Mituzas (Midom) 6 Thomas Braun (Redlinux) 7 Jussi-Ville Heiskanen (Cimon Avaro) 8 Steve Smith (Sarcasticidealist) 9 Dan Rosenthal (Swatjester) 10 José Gustavo Góngora (Góngora) 11 Brady Brim-DeForest (Bradybd) 12 Lourie Pieterse (LouriePieterse) 13 Adam Koenigsberg (CastAStone) 14 Ralph Potdevin (Aruspice) 15 Beauford Anton Stenberg (B9 hummingbird hovering) 16 Gregory Kohs (Thekohser) 17 Kevin Riley O'Keeffe (KevinOKeeffe) 18 Relly Komaruzaman (Relly Komaruzaman) A full pairwise defeats table will be posted shortly. These names have been respectfully submitted to the Board, which has moved to seat the top three candidates. The Committee wishes to thank all those who submitted themselves as candidates. It was a broad and diverse field this year. We also wish to recognize the many volunteers that helped with this process. The committee extends its gratitude and thanks to them For the committee, Philippe ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l Congrats to the winners! -Chad ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Britain or Ukraine? What UK stands for in Wikimedia jargon
Hi Pavlo, I'm glad this issue has risen up here and I'm sure the United Kingdom and Ukraine chapters can come up with something together that solves this rather - Pavlo Shevelo pavlo.shev...@gmail.com wrote: From: Pavlo Shevelo pavlo.shev...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 22 July, 2009 10:26:02 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Britain or Ukraine? What UK stands for in Wikimedia jargon Hello Teofilo, I appreciate a lot that you rose up this issue of confusion (I was planning to do that myself a bit later). I'm from Ukrainian WP (recently - from WMF chapter for Ukraine as well) and I've met many times those confusions/misunderstandings starting from http://uk.wikipedia.org vs. http://uk.wikimedia.org I'm sure that this issue deserves some portion of attention thorough brainstorming ;) On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Teofiloteofilow...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody; This is to say that I have written a piece on this topic at : http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page#uk.wikimedia.org_is_Wikimedia_Ukraine,_isn't_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 ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Britain or Ukraine? What UK stands for in Wikimedia jargon
- Nikola Smolenski smole...@eunet.yu wrote: I suggest a hatnote on the main page of the site: This is the website of Wikimedia United Kingdom. For other uses, see uk.wikimedia.org (disambiguation). I've added a hatnote in the meantime redirecting users to UK-WP and WM-UA. -- Andrew Turvey Secretary Wikimedia UK Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Ltd is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL, United Kingdom. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Britain or Ukraine? What UK stands for in Wikimedia jargon
Hi Pavlo, I'm glad this issue has risen up here and I'm sure the United Kingdom and Ukraine chapters can come up with something together that solves this to both chapters satisfaction. Could we take this offline and start a bilateral discussion rather than doing this via an open mailing list. Regards, Andrew Turvey Secretary Wikimedia UK Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Ltd is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL, United Kingdom. - Pavlo Shevelo pavlo.shev...@gmail.com wrote: From: Pavlo Shevelo pavlo.shev...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Wednesday, 22 July, 2009 10:26:02 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Britain or Ukraine? What UK stands for in Wikimedia jargon Hello Teofilo, I appreciate a lot that you rose up this issue of confusion (I was planning to do that myself a bit later). I'm from Ukrainian WP (recently - from WMF chapter for Ukraine as well) and I've met many times those confusions/misunderstandings starting from http://uk.wikipedia.org vs. http://uk.wikimedia.org I'm sure that this issue deserves some portion of attention thorough brainstorming ;) On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Teofiloteofilow...@gmail.com wrote: Hello everybody; This is to say that I have written a piece on this topic at : http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Main_Page#uk.wikimedia.org_is_Wikimedia_Ukraine,_isn't_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 -- Andrew Turvey Secretary Wikimedia UK Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Ltd is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL, United Kingdom. ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems
Seems like a very useful service. Would the Foundation be interesting in taking ownership of this URL? If so, would Blad be willing to give/sell it to them? If so, could it be incorporated into a sidebar link similar to permanent link? - John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no wrote: From: John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, 17 July, 2009 20:38:09 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems This is a wikipedian from Norway. John Erling Blad Wikimedia Norway Chad wrote: On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Chad wrote: Does anyone know the guy who owns enwp.org? That being said, enwp.org/?oldid=1234 does work :) -Chad (Asked whois.pir.org:43 about enwp.org) Domain ID: D148943548-LROR Domain Name: ENWP.ORG Created On: 23-Aug-2007 14: 33: 18 UTC Last Updated On: 21-Sep-2008 00: 28: 40 UTC Expiration Date: 23-Aug-2009 14: 33: 18 UTC Sponsoring Registrar: ASCIO Technologies Inc. - Denmark (R76-LROR) Status: OK Registrant ID: AT9622172-051 Registrant Name: Thomas Kjoerberg Registrant Street1: Groennevollen 14 Registrant Street2: Registrant Street3: Registrant City: Bergen Registrant State/Province: -- Registrant Postal Code: 5016 Registrant Country: NO Registrant Phone: 47.99298989 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email: tl-lo...@hotmail.com Admin ID: AT4607819-051 Admin Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Admin Organization: One.com A/S Admin Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Admin Street2: Admin Street3: Admin City: Copenhagen V Admin State/Province: Admin Postal Code: 1560 Admin Country: DK Admin Phone: 45.46907100 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: 45.70205872 Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Tech ID: AT9622194-051 Tech Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Tech Organization: One.com A/S Tech Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Tech Street2: Tech Street3: Tech City: Copenhagen V Tech State/Province: Tech Postal Code: 1560 Tech Country: DK Tech Phone: 45.46907100 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX: 45.70205872 Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Name Server: NS1.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS2.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS3.B-ONE.NU Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l I did the whois too, but I don't know him. I was asking if (in general) we know the guy who runs it :) -Chad ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems
Sorry I misunderstood! Great to hear WM-NO is following up. - John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no wrote: From: John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Sunday, 19 July, 2009 00:26:28 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems The domain is not mine, nor does it belong to Wikimedia Norway, it is another wikipedian from Norway who owns the domain. Wikimedia Norway has been in contact with him about the domain and the future use of the service, and another wikipedian has also made inquiries. John Erling Blad Wikimedia Norway Andrew Turvey wrote: Seems like a very useful service. Would the Foundation be interesting in taking ownership of this URL? If so, would Blad be willing to give/sell it to them? If so, could it be incorporated into a sidebar link similar to permanent link? - John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no wrote: From: John at Darkstar vac...@jeb.no To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, 17 July, 2009 20:38:09 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, Portugal Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Attribution on small interactive devices and systems This is a wikipedian from Norway. John Erling Blad Wikimedia Norway Chad wrote: On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 12:19 PM, Philippe Beaudettepbeaude...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Jul 17, 2009, at 8:25 AM, Chad wrote: Does anyone know the guy who owns enwp.org? That being said, enwp.org/?oldid=1234 does work :) -Chad (Asked whois.pir.org:43 about enwp.org) Domain ID: D148943548-LROR Domain Name: ENWP.ORG Created On: 23-Aug-2007 14: 33: 18 UTC Last Updated On: 21-Sep-2008 00: 28: 40 UTC Expiration Date: 23-Aug-2009 14: 33: 18 UTC Sponsoring Registrar: ASCIO Technologies Inc. - Denmark (R76-LROR) Status: OK Registrant ID: AT9622172-051 Registrant Name: Thomas Kjoerberg Registrant Street1: Groennevollen 14 Registrant Street2: Registrant Street3: Registrant City: Bergen Registrant State/Province: -- Registrant Postal Code: 5016 Registrant Country: NO Registrant Phone: 47.99298989 Registrant Phone Ext.: Registrant FAX: Registrant FAX Ext.: Registrant Email: tl-lo...@hotmail.com Admin ID: AT4607819-051 Admin Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Admin Organization: One.com A/S Admin Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Admin Street2: Admin Street3: Admin City: Copenhagen V Admin State/Province: Admin Postal Code: 1560 Admin Country: DK Admin Phone: 45.46907100 Admin Phone Ext.: Admin FAX: 45.70205872 Admin FAX Ext.: Admin Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Tech ID: AT9622194-051 Tech Name: Hostmaster Funktionen Tech Organization: One.com A/S Tech Street1: Kalvebod Brygge 45 Tech Street2: Tech Street3: Tech City: Copenhagen V Tech State/Province: Tech Postal Code: 1560 Tech Country: DK Tech Phone: 45.46907100 Tech Phone Ext.: Tech FAX: 45.70205872 Tech FAX Ext.: Tech Email: hostmas...@b-one.nu Name Server: NS1.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS2.B-ONE.NU Name Server: NS3.B-ONE.NU Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Name Server: Philippe Beaudette Facilitator, Strategic Plan Wikimedia Foundation pbeaude...@wikimedia.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l I did the whois too, but I don't know him. I was asking if (in general) we know the guy who runs it :) -Chad ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https
