Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of conscience Fwd: [REA]
The entire editorial board resigned over the way the publisher was doing it, and that it indicates the true meaning of such a precedent. On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 6:58 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: > hi, > > as far as I know, these prices are not established basing on the cost side, > but the opportunity to charge scholars (who can often justify 3k expense in > a larger grant budget). All this business is quite shady and despicable in > many cases (when the publishers do not offer anything in exchange, barely > support the publication process and the journal, etc.), but in some cases > there is a professional support at least. > > best, > > dj > > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 12:29 PM, rupert THURNER >wrote: > > > it seems that CEO of taylor & francis, Roger Horton [2], wanted to charge > > nearly 3000 USD to publish an article accessible without paywall in their > > "journal of library administration" [0]. they belong to informa, with its > > CEO, Peter Rigby [1]. > > > > would 3000 usd in future be then a fair price the wikimedia movement > should > > offer scientific authors and reviewing groups to publish an article as > > cc-by-sa? i was trying to get some information to calculate if this > number > > does make any sense [3][4][5][6][7] > > * 15'000 - 25'000 peer reviewed journals > > * 1'300'000 peer reviewed papers published a year > > * 3.5 % of them open available, further 4.6 % after some embargo period > > * 4'000 publishers > > * 2'200'000 books published a year > > * 2012 reed elsevier numbers: > >* total revenue: $9bn > >* profit: £2bn > >* revenue scientific publications: £3 bn > >* electronic revenue: 54% > >* user&subscription revenue: 70% > >* 30'000 people > > * 2011 informa / taylor francis numbers: > >* total revenue $2 bn > >* profit $511 m > >* publishing business 54% of total revenue > >* publishing business 69% of profit > >* 67% of publishing revenues is through subscriptions > >* part of it academic information (AI) > > * 25% of groups revenue > > * 35% of groups profit > > * 20% of groups employees (<1600, out of 8300) > > * 1'600 academic journals > > * 3'500 new books published > > > > this would mean, if one paper costs $3'000 * 1'300'000 = 3'900'000'000 > ... > > the peer reviewed scientific publishing market would be a $4bn market in > > 2013. 2003 the guardian reported the "scientific publishing market" worth > > £4.5bn. [8] and, it would mean 1 person at a publisher works full time > for > > one academic journal published. "open access" et al is listed as > "external > > risk" e.g. in reed elseviers annual report. profit in the academic > > information domain seems to be > 30% of the revenue. > > > > [0] > > > > > http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/journals-editorial-board-resigns-in-protest-of-publishers-policy-toward-authors/43149 > > [1] http://www.informa.com/Who-We-Are/Board-of-Directors/Peter-Rigby/ > > [2] https://twitter.com/RogerGHorton > > [3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2909426/ > > [4] http://informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html > > [5] http://www.worldometers.info/books/ > > [6] > > http://reporting.reedelsevier.com/media/174016/reed_elsevier_ar_2012.pdf > > [7] > > > > > http://www.informa.com/Documents/Investor%20Relations/Reports/2011/AnnualReport_2011.pdf > > [8] > http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2003/dec/12/houseofcommons.research > > > > > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Everton Zanella Alvarenga < > > everton.alvare...@okfn.org> wrote: > > > > > Good example. > > > > > > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > > From: Barbara Dieu > > > Date: 2013/3/27 > > > Subject: [REA] Crisis of conscience > > > To: rea-li...@googlegroups.com > > > > > > > > > Entire library journal editorial board resigns, citing 'crisis of > > > conscience' after death of Aaron Swartz > > > > > > In a dramatic show of support for the open access movement, the > > > editor-in-chief and entire editorial board of the Journal of Library > > > Administration announced their resignation last week. In a letter to > > > contributors, the board singled out a conflict with owners over the > > > journal's licensing terms, which stripped authors of almost all claim > > > to ownership of their work. > > > > > > > > > > > > http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/26/4149752/library-journal-resigns-for-open-access-citing-aaron-swartz > > > > > > Um abc > > > B. > > > > > > -- > > > Barbara Dieu > > > http://barbaradieu.com > > > http://beespace.net > > > > > > ___ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > > > > -- > > __ >
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
> > Hi, is there any directory or file or whatever with the codes for > campaigns? Nope; not yet. I'll have to get Zack and Megan to write something up. I see only codes without sense. I feel there's a matrix joke here that I don't want to make. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Dennis Tobar wrote: > Hi, is there any directory or file or whatever with the codes of > campaigns?, I see only codes without sense. > > Regards... > > Dennis Tobar Calderón > El 01/04/2013 18:46, "Matthew Walker" escribió: > > > > > > > On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv > > > files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars > > daily??? > > > > > > Depends on the day :p We had a 2 million dollar day when we opened the > > floodgates in the US, UK, CA, AU, and NZ (We had five; I think NZ was the > > fifth.) > > > > Keep this in mind though; if the fundraiser is expected to raise ~35M > > that's ~100k a day we need to raise! And the amount we're expected to > raise > > keeps going up. > > > > ~Matt Walker > > Wikimedia Foundation > > Fundraising Technology Team > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Thomas Morton < > > morton.tho...@googlemail.com> > > wrote: > > > Not uncommon for Xkcd :p > > > > > > Although the article being used is changing so rapidly that it's > unlikely > > > to cause much disruption. > > > > > > On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv > > > files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars > > daily??? > > > :s > > > > > > Tom > > > > > > On Monday, April 1, 2013, Deryck Chan wrote: > > > > > >> As a side note, the first panel of the comic also openly calls its > > readers > > >> to edit war over certain articles. > > >> > > >> > > >> On 1 April 2013 20:22, Manuel Schneider < > manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch > > > > >> >wrote: > > >> > > >> > Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an > interactivly > > >> > growing dog: "The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the > > >> > Wikimedia Foundation via this link." > > >> > > > >> > http://xkcd.org/ > > >> > > > >> > Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF > through > > >> > this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the > > >> > donation link but how can it fetch the amount? > > >> > > > >> > Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe > > and > > >> > the WMF beforehand? > > >> > > > >> > /Manuel > > >> > -- > > >> > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > > >> > Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch > > >> > > > >> > ___ > > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > >> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > >> > Unsubscribe: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > >> > > > >> ___ > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list > > >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > >> > > > ___ > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Hi, is there any directory or file or whatever with the codes of campaigns?, I see only codes without sense. Regards... Dennis Tobar Calderón El 01/04/2013 18:46, "Matthew Walker" escribió: > > > > On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv > > files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars > daily??? > > > Depends on the day :p We had a 2 million dollar day when we opened the > floodgates in the US, UK, CA, AU, and NZ (We had five; I think NZ was the > fifth.) > > Keep this in mind though; if the fundraiser is expected to raise ~35M > that's ~100k a day we need to raise! And the amount we're expected to raise > keeps going up. > > ~Matt Walker > Wikimedia Foundation > Fundraising Technology Team > > > On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Thomas Morton < > morton.tho...@googlemail.com> > wrote: > > Not uncommon for Xkcd :p > > > > Although the article being used is changing so rapidly that it's unlikely > > to cause much disruption. > > > > On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv > > files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars > daily??? > > :s > > > > Tom > > > > On Monday, April 1, 2013, Deryck Chan wrote: > > > >> As a side note, the first panel of the comic also openly calls its > readers > >> to edit war over certain articles. > >> > >> > >> On 1 April 2013 20:22, Manuel Schneider > >> >wrote: > >> > >> > Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an interactivly > >> > growing dog: "The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the > >> > Wikimedia Foundation via this link." > >> > > >> > http://xkcd.org/ > >> > > >> > Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through > >> > this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the > >> > donation link but how can it fetch the amount? > >> > > >> > Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe > and > >> > the WMF beforehand? > >> > > >> > /Manuel > >> > -- > >> > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > >> > Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch > >> > > >> > ___ > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list > >> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > >> > > >> ___ > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list > >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > >> > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
> > On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv > files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars daily??? Depends on the day :p We had a 2 million dollar day when we opened the floodgates in the US, UK, CA, AU, and NZ (We had five; I think NZ was the fifth.) Keep this in mind though; if the fundraiser is expected to raise ~35M that's ~100k a day we need to raise! And the amount we're expected to raise keeps going up. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Thomas Morton wrote: > Not uncommon for Xkcd :p > > Although the article being used is changing so rapidly that it's unlikely > to cause much disruption. > > On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv > files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars daily??? > :s > > Tom > > On Monday, April 1, 2013, Deryck Chan wrote: > >> As a side note, the first panel of the comic also openly calls its readers >> to edit war over certain articles. >> >> >> On 1 April 2013 20:22, Manuel Schneider >> >wrote: >> >> > Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an interactivly >> > growing dog: "The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the >> > Wikimedia Foundation via this link." >> > >> > http://xkcd.org/ >> > >> > Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through >> > this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the >> > donation link but how can it fetch the amount? >> > >> > Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe and >> > the WMF beforehand? >> > >> > /Manuel >> > -- >> > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens >> > Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch >> > >> > ___ >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list >> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l >> > >> ___ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l >> > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Not uncommon for Xkcd :p Although the article being used is changing so rapidly that it's unlikely to cause much disruption. On an unrelated note; I can't make head nor tails of some of those csv files... Are we really collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars daily??? :s Tom On Monday, April 1, 2013, Deryck Chan wrote: > As a side note, the first panel of the comic also openly calls its readers > to edit war over certain articles. > > > On 1 April 2013 20:22, Manuel Schneider > > >wrote: > > > Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an interactivly > > growing dog: "The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the > > Wikimedia Foundation via this link." > > > > http://xkcd.org/ > > > > Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through > > this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the > > donation link but how can it fetch the amount? > > > > Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe and > > the WMF beforehand? > > > > /Manuel > > -- > > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > > Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
As a side note, the first panel of the comic also openly calls its readers to edit war over certain articles. On 1 April 2013 20:22, Manuel Schneider wrote: > Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an interactivly > growing dog: "The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the > Wikimedia Foundation via this link." > > http://xkcd.org/ > > Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through > this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the > donation link but how can it fetch the amount? > > Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe and > the WMF beforehand? > > /Manuel > -- > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
> > Campaign "unfuckingknown", with the medium being "spontaneous". The amusing entries are either people fuzzing us; or us testing. There's very little validation of the campaign tracking fields. What comes into the system goes out of the system. We probably should clean the data up a little better though. :) I see that there is a special campaign reference in the donation link but > how can it fetch the amount? As stated previously in this thread, the data comes from Samarium; Fundraising's new data proxy. We're slowly going to be adding more and more data to this box as we figure out how to sanitize and redact the data we have. This should help the chapters because part of the data we're going to be releasing as soon as we figure out how to do it will be the banner and landing page impression counts. ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Am 01.04.2013 22:06, schrieb Benoit Landry: > Campaign "unfuckingknown", with the medium being "spontaneous". Perhaps it is > some sort of error handler, when a donation comes from a source the system > cannot determine due to some glitch, it puts it there? ;) maybe it is possible to set your own medium and campaign parameter, so it will automatically show up in this list once a donation has been recorded with it. /Manuel -- Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Campaign "unfuckingknown", with the medium being "spontaneous". Perhaps it is some sort of error handler, when a donation comes from a source the system cannot determine due to some glitch, it puts it there? ;) ,Salvidrim > Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 20:45:18 +0100 > From: morton.tho...@googlemail.com > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF? > > Heh, the CSV's have some amusing, umm. campaign names in them... > > Tom > > > On 1 April 2013 20:42, Manuel Schneider wrote: > > > Thanks Marc and Michael! > > > > Am 01.04.2013 21:28, schrieb Marc A. Pelletier: > > > > > http://samarium.wikimedia.org/ > > > > > > My understanding is that this was done in collaboration with Randall, > > > but it has obvious general applicability. > > > > thanks for this link, I didn't know about this site and data. This is > > very useful. > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Manuel > > -- > > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > > Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Manuel Schneider, 01/04/2013 21:42: Thanks Marc and Michael! Am 01.04.2013 21:28, schrieb Marc A. Pelletier: http://samarium.wikimedia.org/ My understanding is that this was done in collaboration with Randall, but it has obvious general applicability. thanks for this link, I didn't know about this site and data. This is very useful. Dario also copied it to http://datahub.io/en/dataset/wikimedia-fundraiser Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Heh, the CSV's have some amusing, umm. campaign names in them... Tom On 1 April 2013 20:42, Manuel Schneider wrote: > Thanks Marc and Michael! > > Am 01.04.2013 21:28, schrieb Marc A. Pelletier: > > > http://samarium.wikimedia.org/ > > > > My understanding is that this was done in collaboration with Randall, > > but it has obvious general applicability. > > thanks for this link, I didn't know about this site and data. This is > very useful. > > > Regards, > > > Manuel > -- > Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens > Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Thanks Marc and Michael! Am 01.04.2013 21:28, schrieb Marc A. Pelletier: > http://samarium.wikimedia.org/ > > My understanding is that this was done in collaboration with Randall, > but it has obvious general applicability. thanks for this link, I didn't know about this site and data. This is very useful. Regards, Manuel -- Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
On 4/1/2013 12:22 PM, Manuel Schneider wrote: Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an interactivly growing dog: "The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the Wikimedia Foundation via this link." http://xkcd.org/ Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the donation link but how can it fetch the amount? Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe and the WMF beforehand? /Manuel It's real, and there was some technical cooperation to facilitate xkcd being able to pull the amount donated.In April Fool's terms, this is a joke, not a prank (consistent with how we generally handle those activities on Wikipedia as well, I believe). --Michael Snow ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
On 04/01/2013 03:22 PM, Manuel Schneider wrote: > Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through > this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the > donation link but how can it fetch the amount? It is: http://samarium.wikimedia.org/ My understanding is that this was done in collaboration with Randall, but it has obvious general applicability. -- Marc ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] xkcd collecting donations for WMF?
Did you see this April's Fool Day comic on xkcd, with an interactivly growing dog: "The dog gains a pound for every $10 donated to the Wikimedia Foundation via this link." http://xkcd.org/ Is this real? How can it tell how much has been donated to WMF through this comic? I see that there is a special campaign reference in the donation link but how can it fetch the amount? Has there been any cooperation / negotiation between Randall Munroe and the WMF beforehand? /Manuel -- Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] questions on the use of banner space to promote a cause
geni wrote: > On 30 March 2013 20:57, James Salsman wrote: >>... >> >> (A) Should the Foundation devote banner space on project home pages to >> CISPA advocacy?[3][4] >> >> (B) Should the Foundation devote banner space on project home pages to >> CALEA advocacy?[5] >> >> (C) Should the Foundation devote banner space on project home pages to CFAA >> advocacy?[6] > > No since none of those have any impact on our core issues. I disagree. All of those measures represent various forms of government intrusion likely to change editor behaviors in a way which can reasonably be expected to degrade article quality and comprehensiveness. Oliver Keyes wrote: > On 30 March 2013 20:57, James Salsman wrote: > >> As a more specific practical reformulation of this question, how bad would >> poverty in developed countries have to become before it would be >> appropriate for the Foundation to advocate on the issue? Is it already >> appropriate? Would it only be appropriate if the proportion of editors >> leaving the project due to personal poverty was increasing? Would it never >> be appropriate? > > Speaking personally: ... It would, practically speaking, never be appropriate > for us to spend page impressions or chunks of page impressions on this kind > of advocacy - I say "practically" because, while things might alter slightly > if it turned out editors were leaving in droves due to poverty, this > seems...'ludicrously unlikely' doesn't cover it. I presume that this opinion doesn't have any actual data behind it. Here is some actual data, from the county where I went to school: "The school system, which keeps the best records of homelessness in the county, says the number of homeless students rose from 59 in 2001 to 2,812 in the current school year." -- http://prospect.org/article/weeklies So there you have an example of students who would otherwise likely join in the pool of potential editors in the developed world. Over the period of time that Wikipedia has existed, they have become far less likely to become editors because they have far less free time, less access to internet resources, less access to personal educational resources, and less financial capacity to perform ordinary tasks in support of editing such as travel to university libraries and obtaining specialist reference materials. > James, I appreciate that you care a lot about these issues. But please stop > trying to use the movement as your personal soapbox. When poverty increases in the developed world, the demand for my customers' products increases in the developing world. Over the past six years, the extent to which this has happened has far surpassed and entirely supplanted my income as a software engineer in Silicon Valley. I resent the insinuation that I am doing anything for myself by showing the connections between poverty and the health of the editor community, when in fact the opposite is true. Sincerely, James Salsman ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Transition team update
Thanks Jan-Bart, On 1 April 2013 17:17, Jan-Bart de Vreede wrote: > With a little help from TheHelpfulOne we have made a start with the Meta > pages for the transition team. > Credit to Sj and Phoebe for some clean up too! > The central page is located at: > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ED_Transition_Team > > Feel free to browse and comment/suggest! There's also an RfC at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ED_Transition_Team/Request_for_comments - please leave any suggestions/comments there. -- Thehelpfulone https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Thehelpfulone ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] Transition team update
Hello Everyone, With a little help from TheHelpfulOne we have made a start with the Meta pages for the transition team. The central page is located at: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ED_Transition_Team Feel free to browse and comment/suggest! Jan-Bart de Vreede Chair Transition Team ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Adopt a page"
Le 2013-03-30 20:51, Steven Walling a écrit : There's actually plenty of even more neutral ways to do this IMO, and none of them have anything to do with promoting the donor or paid editing. For example: a simple count of how many readers donated in support of this article. "This article sponsored by 70 Wikipedia readers like you. Contribute today by editing or donating." Or something like that. No. First, you'll also need to put how many person edited the article, how many times it was edited, and blablabla numbers. Not only could it prevent new useful edits (oh it was already so much raffined, how could I dare edit it), but it would probably encourage "let's make this article have a big edit count" useless contributions. Now I don't understand, do we have suddely so much need for paid edit? I mean, sure I would love spending my days "improving" wikipedia and other wikimedia projects, being paid for that. Give me a median salary, and I sign right now, and I'm sure I won't be alone here. But I also would be serriously affraid that it could harm the movement, which I thing is far more important than my personal pleasure of being a full time editor. -- Association Culture-Libre http://www.culture-libre.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] "Adopt a page"
Le 2013-03-30 09:54, Craig Franklin a écrit : It comes down to asking what the purpose of the Foundation and a project like Wikipedia is. Is it to produce a free source of knowledge, or is to promote volunteerism? If it's possible to build a better encyclopædia by encouraging paid editing or allowing for-profit entities to sponsor a particular page, then that's a possibility that we ought to make ourselves open to. Volunteerism, of course, has served the movement well and got us to where we find ourselves today, but it is not and should not be considered an end unto itself. Of course, as has been pointed out, there are potential pitfalls with this model that have been discussed many times - there are many potential COI issues, and paid editing in some areas may discourage unpaid editing in others. However, I think it would be unwise simply to dismiss those sort of possibilities out of hand. How do you measure risk? Because, as I percieve it, once you lost unpaid editors confidence, it will be at least as difficult to make them come back as to go from scratch again. So you better have to be absolutely sure it won't break the community before you go in such major political change. -- Association Culture-Libre http://www.culture-libre.org/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of conscience Fwd: [REA]
hi, as far as I know, these prices are not established basing on the cost side, but the opportunity to charge scholars (who can often justify 3k expense in a larger grant budget). All this business is quite shady and despicable in many cases (when the publishers do not offer anything in exchange, barely support the publication process and the journal, etc.), but in some cases there is a professional support at least. best, dj On Mon, Apr 1, 2013 at 12:29 PM, rupert THURNER wrote: > it seems that CEO of taylor & francis, Roger Horton [2], wanted to charge > nearly 3000 USD to publish an article accessible without paywall in their > "journal of library administration" [0]. they belong to informa, with its > CEO, Peter Rigby [1]. > > would 3000 usd in future be then a fair price the wikimedia movement should > offer scientific authors and reviewing groups to publish an article as > cc-by-sa? i was trying to get some information to calculate if this number > does make any sense [3][4][5][6][7] > * 15'000 - 25'000 peer reviewed journals > * 1'300'000 peer reviewed papers published a year > * 3.5 % of them open available, further 4.6 % after some embargo period > * 4'000 publishers > * 2'200'000 books published a year > * 2012 reed elsevier numbers: >* total revenue: $9bn >* profit: £2bn >* revenue scientific publications: £3 bn >* electronic revenue: 54% >* user&subscription revenue: 70% >* 30'000 people > * 2011 informa / taylor francis numbers: >* total revenue $2 bn >* profit $511 m >* publishing business 54% of total revenue >* publishing business 69% of profit >* 67% of publishing revenues is through subscriptions >* part of it academic information (AI) > * 25% of groups revenue > * 35% of groups profit > * 20% of groups employees (<1600, out of 8300) > * 1'600 academic journals > * 3'500 new books published > > this would mean, if one paper costs $3'000 * 1'300'000 = 3'900'000'000 ... > the peer reviewed scientific publishing market would be a $4bn market in > 2013. 2003 the guardian reported the "scientific publishing market" worth > £4.5bn. [8] and, it would mean 1 person at a publisher works full time for > one academic journal published. "open access" et al is listed as "external > risk" e.g. in reed elseviers annual report. profit in the academic > information domain seems to be > 30% of the revenue. > > [0] > > http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/journals-editorial-board-resigns-in-protest-of-publishers-policy-toward-authors/43149 > [1] http://www.informa.com/Who-We-Are/Board-of-Directors/Peter-Rigby/ > [2] https://twitter.com/RogerGHorton > [3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2909426/ > [4] http://informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html > [5] http://www.worldometers.info/books/ > [6] > http://reporting.reedelsevier.com/media/174016/reed_elsevier_ar_2012.pdf > [7] > > http://www.informa.com/Documents/Investor%20Relations/Reports/2011/AnnualReport_2011.pdf > [8] http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2003/dec/12/houseofcommons.research > > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Everton Zanella Alvarenga < > everton.alvare...@okfn.org> wrote: > > > Good example. > > > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > From: Barbara Dieu > > Date: 2013/3/27 > > Subject: [REA] Crisis of conscience > > To: rea-li...@googlegroups.com > > > > > > Entire library journal editorial board resigns, citing 'crisis of > > conscience' after death of Aaron Swartz > > > > In a dramatic show of support for the open access movement, the > > editor-in-chief and entire editorial board of the Journal of Library > > Administration announced their resignation last week. In a letter to > > contributors, the board singled out a conflict with owners over the > > journal's licensing terms, which stripped authors of almost all claim > > to ownership of their work. > > > > > > > http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/26/4149752/library-journal-resigns-for-open-access-citing-aaron-swartz > > > > Um abc > > B. > > > > -- > > Barbara Dieu > > http://barbaradieu.com > > http://beespace.net > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > -- __ dr hab. Dariusz Jemielniak profesor zarządzania kierownik katedry Zarządzania Międzynarodowego i centrum badawczego CROW Akademia Leona Koźmińskiego http://www.crow.alk.edu.pl ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Crisis of conscience Fwd: [REA]
it seems that CEO of taylor & francis, Roger Horton [2], wanted to charge nearly 3000 USD to publish an article accessible without paywall in their "journal of library administration" [0]. they belong to informa, with its CEO, Peter Rigby [1]. would 3000 usd in future be then a fair price the wikimedia movement should offer scientific authors and reviewing groups to publish an article as cc-by-sa? i was trying to get some information to calculate if this number does make any sense [3][4][5][6][7] * 15'000 - 25'000 peer reviewed journals * 1'300'000 peer reviewed papers published a year * 3.5 % of them open available, further 4.6 % after some embargo period * 4'000 publishers * 2'200'000 books published a year * 2012 reed elsevier numbers: * total revenue: $9bn * profit: £2bn * revenue scientific publications: £3 bn * electronic revenue: 54% * user&subscription revenue: 70% * 30'000 people * 2011 informa / taylor francis numbers: * total revenue $2 bn * profit $511 m * publishing business 54% of total revenue * publishing business 69% of profit * 67% of publishing revenues is through subscriptions * part of it academic information (AI) * 25% of groups revenue * 35% of groups profit * 20% of groups employees (<1600, out of 8300) * 1'600 academic journals * 3'500 new books published this would mean, if one paper costs $3'000 * 1'300'000 = 3'900'000'000 ... the peer reviewed scientific publishing market would be a $4bn market in 2013. 2003 the guardian reported the "scientific publishing market" worth £4.5bn. [8] and, it would mean 1 person at a publisher works full time for one academic journal published. "open access" et al is listed as "external risk" e.g. in reed elseviers annual report. profit in the academic information domain seems to be > 30% of the revenue. [0] http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/journals-editorial-board-resigns-in-protest-of-publishers-policy-toward-authors/43149 [1] http://www.informa.com/Who-We-Are/Board-of-Directors/Peter-Rigby/ [2] https://twitter.com/RogerGHorton [3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2909426/ [4] http://informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html [5] http://www.worldometers.info/books/ [6] http://reporting.reedelsevier.com/media/174016/reed_elsevier_ar_2012.pdf [7] http://www.informa.com/Documents/Investor%20Relations/Reports/2011/AnnualReport_2011.pdf [8] http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2003/dec/12/houseofcommons.research On Sat, Mar 30, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Everton Zanella Alvarenga < everton.alvare...@okfn.org> wrote: > Good example. > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Barbara Dieu > Date: 2013/3/27 > Subject: [REA] Crisis of conscience > To: rea-li...@googlegroups.com > > > Entire library journal editorial board resigns, citing 'crisis of > conscience' after death of Aaron Swartz > > In a dramatic show of support for the open access movement, the > editor-in-chief and entire editorial board of the Journal of Library > Administration announced their resignation last week. In a letter to > contributors, the board singled out a conflict with owners over the > journal's licensing terms, which stripped authors of almost all claim > to ownership of their work. > > > http://www.theverge.com/2013/3/26/4149752/library-journal-resigns-for-open-access-citing-aaron-swartz > > Um abc > B. > > -- > Barbara Dieu > http://barbaradieu.com > http://beespace.net > > ___ > Wikimedia-l mailing list > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l > ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
