Re: [Wikimedia-l] Early thoughts regarding a global code of conduct and a GCC committee

[Gnangarra]

Kaya

When we look at number we to interpret them in ways that the numbers
themselves don't.

Think about this 40% that think the the policies need 'quite a bit of
improvement' but that doesnt tell us if it because the policy failed to
protect them.  More importantly it also doesn't say if was the way the
policy was interpreted or applied or if the community just failed to uphold
the policy because one party was being protected. We can all bring
instances of where policy fails or where policy is use as means of
asserting power to the table, en wikipedia's arbcom is littered with
decisions arising from such disputes.

How could 7 people sit in judgement over thousands of cultural norms and
practices spread across 300 plus languages and really make any honest
assessment of what took place, why , or the understandings.  How could
someone who lives Iceland understand the cultural differences in a place
like India and understand all that is taking place. Could someone in India
who lives those experiences even understand the intricacies of every
language, religion, and caste that makes up the society even do it without
bringing their own bias to the fore.   I'm in Australia where we have 300+
plus unique cultures and languages one of the most difficult things is to
unpack is the cultural bias of there being a mono-generic "Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Culture" even on Wikipedia we speak mostly in
mono-generic tone because its a bias that runs through the sources.

The GCC would need to be significantly bigger in number to ensure
diversity, it'd need an even larger number of trusted interpreters even
then one word that doesnt translate well could change the whole outcome.
Yes our policies arent perfect but its them and way they are interpreted at
community level that needs the work, not from some small privileged group
sitting up high judgement.

We need our affiliates to be give the resource to run training session and
workshops for admins on how policies should work, we need to address the
wikilawyers and pendants who revel in the meaning of a single word rather
than the spirit of its intention.

Even if we were to get it absolutely right with the first 7 people, we know
that people with agendas are attracted to and will eventually force their
way on such committees and remodel it in their own vision.  Honestly we
need to stop building castles and anointing kings instead focus on making
more room in the fields so everything can grow.

Boodar-wun

On Tue, 21 Apr 2020 at 01:40, Philip Kopetzky 
wrote:

> Hi Pine,
>
> I don't think a global commitee would be the right place - stewards are
> currently filling this gap involuntarily, and it seems extremely difficult
> to judge situations on a local project properly (the Azerbaijani case might
> come to mind here).
>
> For me the ideal version of a universal CoC would limit itself to a very
> basic foundation, which would then be adapted and developed on a regional
> and local level to better fit the needs of the various communities, as you
> mention above, including local laws that may prohibit certain behaviour (as
> is the case in Germany and Austria with any glorification of
> nationalsocialism for example).
> The global council would also arbitrate in certain conflicts that happen
> between regions or projects, but this is more of a theoretical experiment
> right now I think.
>
> Best,
> Philip
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 04:37, Pine W  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I have published a draft proposal at the bottom of
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct. Discussion
> > is welcome.
> >
> > A difficult issue is how to support diversity of expressions and
> > opinions, even when those expressions or opinions may offend others,
> > while also supporting civility. At this point, I think that civility
> > policies are best left to local communities. However, I welcome
> > others' opinions, including alternate proposals.
> >
> > Pine
> > ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
GN.

*Power of Diverse Collaboration*
*Sharing knowledge brings people together*
Wikimania Bangkok 2021
August
hosted by ESEAP

Wikimania: https://wik

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

[Jake Orlowitz]

Thanks Tito, Pete and Shani...

There is a formal comment period open until May 6. The U.S. government is
accepting letters or briefs from any individual or organization.

I've shared my own in the hopes others will do something similar.

If it hasn't already, the Wikimedia Foundation's Research and Public Policy
teams should seriously consider a submission.

It would also be appropriate for Wikimedia affiliates with any U.S.
presence, such as Wiki Project Med, to submit their own letters.

Submission is simple and instructions are here:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/19/2020-03189/request-for-information-public-access-to-peer-reviewed-scholarly-publications-data-and-code

This is a unique opportunity to shift funding and scholarly communications
policy. We shouldn't waste it.

Jake Orlowitz
Founder of the Wikipedia Library


On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 2:54 PM 
wrote:

> Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>1. Re: Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy (Pete Forsyth)
>2. Re: Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy (Shani Evenstein)
>3. Re: Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy (Yaroslav Blanter)
>4. Re: Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy (James Heilman)
>
>
> --
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:26:29 -0700
> From: Pete Forsyth 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy
> Message-ID:
> <
> cagwts0h0n3m7kntzq6oaqu2yx_94rtnyxz2_fpdvrtd50e-...@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Jake,
>
> How can we most effectively support your excellent effort with this?
>
> -Pete
> --
> Pete Forsyth
> User:Peteforsyth on Meta, English Wikisource, English Wikipedia, etc.
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:22 PM Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > Very well-written and well-supported by statistics. Thanks for sharing.
> > Regards.
> > User:Titodutta
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:41 AM Jake Orlowitz  wrote:
> >
> > > My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy
> regarding
> > a
> > > proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded
> research...
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world. Each
> > month
> > > 200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
> > > information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are
> loaded
> > > by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.
> > >
> > > Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA
> licensing
> > > as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
> > > Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access
> scholarly
> > > research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds of
> > > millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper research.
> > >
> > > Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader
> > landscape
> > > of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to
> > verify
> > > the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through citations
> > > readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the books,
> > > scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.
> > >
> > > A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in
> > Wikipedia
> > > found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
> > > publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely available
> > on
> > > the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of
> public
> > > education and digital literacy.
> > >
> > > Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus. By
> > April
> > > 2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
> > > Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles and
> 1
> > > billion bytes of text across more than 255 languages--has been ranked
> as
> > > one of the top-3 most viewed sources for medical information on the
> > entire
> > > internet.
> > >
> > > References are essential to the public's trust in Wikipedia. Indeed,
> > > Wikipedia's medical content is supported by 757,855 references in
> English
> > > and 1,596,528 in other languages, for a total of 2,354,383 across all
> > > languages. In English 168,985 have a PMID while 261,850 do in other
> > > languages. This means at least 430

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WikiSeder and four drinks to free knowledge

[Pharos]

You can see all of our recent Wikipedia Weekly Network episodes here, and
can subscribe to us on YouTube, please do because when we get 100
subscribers, we get a non-obnoxious url:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCa5oYsCabGo7XwwKGqo7Qcw/videos

100th subscriber gets a free stub from me!

Thanks,
Richard
(User:Pharos)

On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 10:50 AM Pharos 
wrote:

> I would like to share our experience earlier this week with the WikiSeder,
> a secular celebration of wiki wisdom and free culture for the age of the
> quarantini.
>
> As we pass through our current plague, we came together from our lockdowns
> to retell stories of liberation and crisis overcome through fellowship and
> information-sharing, with some light-hearted discussion of strategy and
> barnstar culture too.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiSeder
>
> Hosted by Wikimedia NYC and friends on the Wikipedia Weekly Network, which
> was recently revived as a livestream channel to help bring together our
> community in the current crisis.
>
> You can view  the entirety on YouTube and other platforms, coming soon to
> Commons!
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCvt2DowhM0
>
> Thanks,
> Richard
> (User:Pharos)
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

[Geert Van Pamel]

Perfect statement: only one correction: you need to negate the following 
phrase...

And, if they are *un*able to read and cite it...

If every country would vote an equivalent law for Free Knowledge, the world 
would become a better place to live...

-- Geert Van Pamel

-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Wikimedia-l  Namens Jake Orlowitz
Verzonden: maandag 20 april 2020 22:11
Aan: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Onderwerp: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy regarding a 
proposal for federally mandate open access to 
publicly-funded research...

---

Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world. Each month
200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public information 
is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are 
loaded by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.

Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA licensing as 
well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer 
editors. Yet Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access 
scholarly research. And, if they are able to read and 
cite it, then hundreds of millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for 
deeper research.

Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader landscape of 
reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow 
readers to verify the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through 
citations readers can also deep-dive into any given 
topic by exploring the books, scholarly publications, and news stories 
referenced in an article.

A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in Wikipedia 
found that less than half of the official versions of 
scholarly publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely 
available on the web. This chasm of for editors and for 
readers is a tragedy of public education and digital literacy.

Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus. By April
2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles and 1 
billion bytes of text across more than 255 languages--has 
been ranked as one of the top-3 most viewed sources for medical information on 
the entire internet.

References are essential to the public's trust in Wikipedia. Indeed, 
Wikipedia's medical content is supported by 757,855 references in 
English and 1,596,528 in other languages, for a total of 2,354,383 across all 
languages. In English 168,985 have a PMID while 261,850 
do in other languages. This means at least 430,835 references are journal 
articles.

What happens when those journal articles lie behind a paywall? The public 
suffers from a dearth of good information to make decisions 
about their lives as independent citizens and members of a global community.

As founder of The Wikipedia Library, I arranged partnerships with dozens of 
leading scholarly journals, to give Wikipedia editors free 
access to their reliable content and so they would be able to do effective and 
rigorous research. This time-intensive process took 6 
years to amass access to only 1/5th of the most highly regarded academic 
publications. Frankly, Wikipedia editors--volunteers who 
selflessly give of their intelligence and passion to educate--should not have 
to beg and borrow to access publicly-funded research. 
Readers should not hit paywalls when they are seeking citizen-supported 
knowledge.

I implore you to make the bold but entirely reasonable decision and ensure that 
taxpayers have access to the vital scientific and 
scholarly studies that they themselves fund. This is not only sensible, it is 
essential to civic health, societal progress, and human 
flourishing.


Sincerely,
Jake Orlowitz
Founder of The Wikipedia Library


---

"Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code Resulting 
From Federally Funded Research"

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/19/2020-03189/request-for-information-public-access-to-peer-reviewed-scholarly-publications-data-and-code
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

[James Heilman]

We within the Wikimedia movement have a open access journal without any
publication fees. https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/WikiJournal_User_Group There
are also other platinum open access publishers.

James

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 2:52 PM Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> As an actively publishing researcher, I just know that mandating open
> access publishing would mean that the author pays the (huge) publication
> fee rather than the library pays the subscription. In an ideal world, the
> universities would refund the fees, and will get subsidy from the
> governments, In our real world, the researchers will have to pay everything
> out of their own pocket, with some of them losing all possibilities to
> publish, for the lack of funds. I tried to raise this before, and the
> universal reply was that this is my problem, not the problem of the
> society. I do not expect anything else this time.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:34 PM Shani Evenstein 
> wrote:
>
> > Jake, well written and nicely put.
> > Is this online somewhere, where we can share it further?
> >
> > Best,
> > Shani.
> >
> >
> > ---
> > *Shani Evenstein Sigalov*
> >
> > * Lecturer, Tel Aviv University.
> > * EdTech Innovation Strategist, NY/American Medical Program, Sackler
> School
> > of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.
> >
> > * PhD Candidate, School of Education, Tel Aviv University.
> > * Azrieli Foundation Research Fellow.
> > * OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
> >  on Technology,
> > Internationalization
> > and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv University
> > .
> >
> > * Member of the Board of Trustees
> > ,
> > Wikimedia
> > Foundation .
> > * Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
> > .
> > * Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda .
> >
> > +972-525640648
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:27 PM Pete Forsyth 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Jake,
> > >
> > > How can we most effectively support your excellent effort with this?
> > >
> > > -Pete
> > > --
> > > Pete Forsyth
> > > User:Peteforsyth on Meta, English Wikisource, English Wikipedia, etc.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:22 PM Tito Dutta 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > > Very well-written and well-supported by statistics. Thanks for
> sharing.
> > > > Regards.
> > > > User:Titodutta
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:41 AM Jake Orlowitz 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy
> > > regarding
> > > > a
> > > > > proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded
> > > research...
> > > > >
> > > > > ---
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world.
> Each
> > > > month
> > > > > 200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
> > > > > information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are
> > > loaded
> > > > > by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.
> > > > >
> > > > > Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA
> > > licensing
> > > > > as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
> > > > > Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access
> > > scholarly
> > > > > research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds
> of
> > > > > millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper
> research.
> > > > >
> > > > > Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader
> > > > landscape
> > > > > of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to
> > > > verify
> > > > > the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through
> > citations
> > > > > readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the
> > books,
> > > > > scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.
> > > > >
> > > > > A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in
> > > > Wikipedia
> > > > > found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
> > > > > publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely
> > available
> > > > on
> > > > > the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of
> > > public
> > > > > education and digital literacy.
> > > > >
> > > > > Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus.
> By
> > > > April
> > > > > 2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
> > > > > Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles
> > and
> > > 1
> > > > > billion bytes of text across more than 255 languages--has been
> ranked
> > > as
> > > > > one of the top-3 most viewed sources for medical information on the
> > > > entire
> > > > > internet.
> > > > >
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

[Yaroslav Blanter]

As an actively publishing researcher, I just know that mandating open
access publishing would mean that the author pays the (huge) publication
fee rather than the library pays the subscription. In an ideal world, the
universities would refund the fees, and will get subsidy from the
governments, In our real world, the researchers will have to pay everything
out of their own pocket, with some of them losing all possibilities to
publish, for the lack of funds. I tried to raise this before, and the
universal reply was that this is my problem, not the problem of the
society. I do not expect anything else this time.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 10:34 PM Shani Evenstein 
wrote:

> Jake, well written and nicely put.
> Is this online somewhere, where we can share it further?
>
> Best,
> Shani.
>
>
> ---
> *Shani Evenstein Sigalov*
>
> * Lecturer, Tel Aviv University.
> * EdTech Innovation Strategist, NY/American Medical Program, Sackler School
> of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.
>
> * PhD Candidate, School of Education, Tel Aviv University.
> * Azrieli Foundation Research Fellow.
> * OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
>  on Technology,
> Internationalization
> and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv University
> .
>
> * Member of the Board of Trustees
> ,
> Wikimedia
> Foundation .
> * Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
> .
> * Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda .
>
> +972-525640648
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:27 PM Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
>
> > Jake,
> >
> > How can we most effectively support your excellent effort with this?
> >
> > -Pete
> > --
> > Pete Forsyth
> > User:Peteforsyth on Meta, English Wikisource, English Wikipedia, etc.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:22 PM Tito Dutta  wrote:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > > Very well-written and well-supported by statistics. Thanks for sharing.
> > > Regards.
> > > User:Titodutta
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:41 AM Jake Orlowitz 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy
> > regarding
> > > a
> > > > proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded
> > research...
> > > >
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world. Each
> > > month
> > > > 200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
> > > > information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are
> > loaded
> > > > by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.
> > > >
> > > > Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA
> > licensing
> > > > as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
> > > > Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access
> > scholarly
> > > > research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds of
> > > > millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper research.
> > > >
> > > > Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader
> > > landscape
> > > > of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to
> > > verify
> > > > the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through
> citations
> > > > readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the
> books,
> > > > scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.
> > > >
> > > > A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in
> > > Wikipedia
> > > > found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
> > > > publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely
> available
> > > on
> > > > the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of
> > public
> > > > education and digital literacy.
> > > >
> > > > Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus. By
> > > April
> > > > 2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
> > > > Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles
> and
> > 1
> > > > billion bytes of text across more than 255 languages--has been ranked
> > as
> > > > one of the top-3 most viewed sources for medical information on the
> > > entire
> > > > internet.
> > > >
> > > > References are essential to the public's trust in Wikipedia. Indeed,
> > > > Wikipedia's medical content is supported by 757,855 references in
> > English
> > > > and 1,596,528 in other languages, for a total of 2,354,383 across all
> > > > languages. In English 168,985 have a PMID while 261,850 do in other
> > > > languages. This means at least 430,835 references are journal
> articles.
> > > >
> > > > What happens when those journal articles lie behind a paywall? The
> > public
> > > > suffers from a dearth of good in

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

[Shani Evenstein]

Jake, well written and nicely put.
Is this online somewhere, where we can share it further?

Best,
Shani.


---
*Shani Evenstein Sigalov*

* Lecturer, Tel Aviv University.
* EdTech Innovation Strategist, NY/American Medical Program, Sackler School
of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.

* PhD Candidate, School of Education, Tel Aviv University.
* Azrieli Foundation Research Fellow.
* OER & Emerging Technologies Coordinator, UNESCO Chair
 on Technology, Internationalization
and Education, School of Education, Tel Aviv University
.

* Member of the Board of Trustees
, Wikimedia
Foundation .
* Chairperson, The Hebrew Literature Digitization Society
.
* Chief Editor, Project Ben-Yehuda .

+972-525640648


On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 11:27 PM Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Jake,
>
> How can we most effectively support your excellent effort with this?
>
> -Pete
> --
> Pete Forsyth
> User:Peteforsyth on Meta, English Wikisource, English Wikipedia, etc.
>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:22 PM Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> > Very well-written and well-supported by statistics. Thanks for sharing.
> > Regards.
> > User:Titodutta
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:41 AM Jake Orlowitz  wrote:
> >
> > > My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy
> regarding
> > a
> > > proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded
> research...
> > >
> > > ---
> > >
> > > Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world. Each
> > month
> > > 200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
> > > information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are
> loaded
> > > by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.
> > >
> > > Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA
> licensing
> > > as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
> > > Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access
> scholarly
> > > research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds of
> > > millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper research.
> > >
> > > Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader
> > landscape
> > > of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to
> > verify
> > > the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through citations
> > > readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the books,
> > > scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.
> > >
> > > A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in
> > Wikipedia
> > > found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
> > > publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely available
> > on
> > > the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of
> public
> > > education and digital literacy.
> > >
> > > Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus. By
> > April
> > > 2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
> > > Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles and
> 1
> > > billion bytes of text across more than 255 languages--has been ranked
> as
> > > one of the top-3 most viewed sources for medical information on the
> > entire
> > > internet.
> > >
> > > References are essential to the public's trust in Wikipedia. Indeed,
> > > Wikipedia's medical content is supported by 757,855 references in
> English
> > > and 1,596,528 in other languages, for a total of 2,354,383 across all
> > > languages. In English 168,985 have a PMID while 261,850 do in other
> > > languages. This means at least 430,835 references are journal articles.
> > >
> > > What happens when those journal articles lie behind a paywall? The
> public
> > > suffers from a dearth of good information to make decisions about their
> > > lives as independent citizens and members of a global community.
> > >
> > > As founder of The Wikipedia Library, I arranged partnerships with
> dozens
> > of
> > > leading scholarly journals, to give Wikipedia editors free access to
> > their
> > > reliable content and so they would be able to do effective and rigorous
> > > research. This time-intensive process took 6 years to amass access to
> > only
> > > 1/5th of the most highly regarded academic publications. Frankly,
> > Wikipedia
> > > editors--volunteers who selflessly give of their intelligence and
> passion
> > > to educate--should not have to beg and borrow to access publicly-funded
> > > research. Readers should not hit paywalls when they are seeking
> > > citizen-supported knowledge.
> > >
> > > I implore you to make the bold but entirely reasonable decision and
> > ensure
> > > that taxpayers have access 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

[Pete Forsyth]

Jake,

How can we most effectively support your excellent effort with this?

-Pete
--
Pete Forsyth
User:Peteforsyth on Meta, English Wikisource, English Wikipedia, etc.

On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 1:22 PM Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Hello,
> Very well-written and well-supported by statistics. Thanks for sharing.
> Regards.
> User:Titodutta
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:41 AM Jake Orlowitz  wrote:
>
> > My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy regarding
> a
> > proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded research...
> >
> > ---
> >
> > Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world. Each
> month
> > 200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
> > information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are loaded
> > by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.
> >
> > Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA licensing
> > as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
> > Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access scholarly
> > research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds of
> > millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper research.
> >
> > Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader
> landscape
> > of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to
> verify
> > the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through citations
> > readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the books,
> > scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.
> >
> > A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in
> Wikipedia
> > found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
> > publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely available
> on
> > the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of public
> > education and digital literacy.
> >
> > Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus. By
> April
> > 2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
> > Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles and 1
> > billion bytes of text across more than 255 languages--has been ranked as
> > one of the top-3 most viewed sources for medical information on the
> entire
> > internet.
> >
> > References are essential to the public's trust in Wikipedia. Indeed,
> > Wikipedia's medical content is supported by 757,855 references in English
> > and 1,596,528 in other languages, for a total of 2,354,383 across all
> > languages. In English 168,985 have a PMID while 261,850 do in other
> > languages. This means at least 430,835 references are journal articles.
> >
> > What happens when those journal articles lie behind a paywall? The public
> > suffers from a dearth of good information to make decisions about their
> > lives as independent citizens and members of a global community.
> >
> > As founder of The Wikipedia Library, I arranged partnerships with dozens
> of
> > leading scholarly journals, to give Wikipedia editors free access to
> their
> > reliable content and so they would be able to do effective and rigorous
> > research. This time-intensive process took 6 years to amass access to
> only
> > 1/5th of the most highly regarded academic publications. Frankly,
> Wikipedia
> > editors--volunteers who selflessly give of their intelligence and passion
> > to educate--should not have to beg and borrow to access publicly-funded
> > research. Readers should not hit paywalls when they are seeking
> > citizen-supported knowledge.
> >
> > I implore you to make the bold but entirely reasonable decision and
> ensure
> > that taxpayers have access to the vital scientific and scholarly studies
> > that they themselves fund. This is not only sensible, it is essential to
> > civic health, societal progress, and human flourishing.
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Jake Orlowitz
> > Founder of The Wikipedia Library
> >
> >
> > ---
> >
> > "Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code
> > Resulting From Federally Funded Research"
> >
> >
> >
> https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/19/2020-03189/request-for-information-public-access-to-peer-reviewed-scholarly-publications-data-and-code
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscrib

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

[Tito Dutta]

Hello,
Very well-written and well-supported by statistics. Thanks for sharing.
Regards.
User:Titodutta


On Tue, Apr 21, 2020, 1:41 AM Jake Orlowitz  wrote:

> My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy regarding a
> proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded research...
>
> ---
>
> Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world. Each month
> 200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
> information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are loaded
> by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.
>
> Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA licensing
> as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
> Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access scholarly
> research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds of
> millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper research.
>
> Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader landscape
> of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to verify
> the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through citations
> readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the books,
> scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.
>
> A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in Wikipedia
> found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
> publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely available on
> the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of public
> education and digital literacy.
>
> Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus. By April
> 2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
> Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles and 1
> billion bytes of text across more than 255 languages--has been ranked as
> one of the top-3 most viewed sources for medical information on the entire
> internet.
>
> References are essential to the public's trust in Wikipedia. Indeed,
> Wikipedia's medical content is supported by 757,855 references in English
> and 1,596,528 in other languages, for a total of 2,354,383 across all
> languages. In English 168,985 have a PMID while 261,850 do in other
> languages. This means at least 430,835 references are journal articles.
>
> What happens when those journal articles lie behind a paywall? The public
> suffers from a dearth of good information to make decisions about their
> lives as independent citizens and members of a global community.
>
> As founder of The Wikipedia Library, I arranged partnerships with dozens of
> leading scholarly journals, to give Wikipedia editors free access to their
> reliable content and so they would be able to do effective and rigorous
> research. This time-intensive process took 6 years to amass access to only
> 1/5th of the most highly regarded academic publications. Frankly, Wikipedia
> editors--volunteers who selflessly give of their intelligence and passion
> to educate--should not have to beg and borrow to access publicly-funded
> research. Readers should not hit paywalls when they are seeking
> citizen-supported knowledge.
>
> I implore you to make the bold but entirely reasonable decision and ensure
> that taxpayers have access to the vital scientific and scholarly studies
> that they themselves fund. This is not only sensible, it is essential to
> civic health, societal progress, and human flourishing.
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Jake Orlowitz
> Founder of The Wikipedia Library
>
>
> ---
>
> "Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code
> Resulting From Federally Funded Research"
>
>
> https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/19/2020-03189/request-for-information-public-access-to-peer-reviewed-scholarly-publications-data-and-code
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Comment Open on U.S. Open Access Policy

[Jake Orlowitz]

My Letter to the U.S. Office for Science and Technology Policy regarding a
proposal for federally mandate open access to publicly-funded research...

---

Wikipedia is one of the ten most popular websites in the world. Each month
200,000 editors improve over 6 million articles. This vital public
information is viewed on 1 billion unique devices as our pages are loaded
by people around the globe 7,000 times per second.

Wikipedia is the "free encyclopedia", both in its open CC-BY-SA licensing
as well as the unpaid contributions of its volunteer editors. Yet
Wikipedia's hundreds of thousands of editors struggle to access scholarly
research. And, if they are able to read and cite it, then hundreds of
millions of readers cannot verify or explore it for deeper research.

Citations are the bridge between Wikipedia articles and a broader landscape
of reliable, secondary sources. Citations not only allow readers to verify
the reliability of the facts they find in Wikipedia; through citations
readers can also deep-dive into any given topic by exploring the books,
scholarly publications, and news stories referenced in an article.

A recently released dataset of all citations with identifiers in Wikipedia
found that less than half of the official versions of scholarly
publications cited with an identifier in Wikipedia are freely available on
the web. This chasm of for editors and for readers is a tragedy of public
education and digital literacy.

Just look at the most recent global catastrophe with Coronavirus. By April
2020 the main articles on COVID-19 had received 50 million views.
Wikipedia's medical content--made up of more than 155,000 articles and 1
billion bytes of text across more than 255 languages--has been ranked as
one of the top-3 most viewed sources for medical information on the entire
internet.

References are essential to the public's trust in Wikipedia. Indeed,
Wikipedia's medical content is supported by 757,855 references in English
and 1,596,528 in other languages, for a total of 2,354,383 across all
languages. In English 168,985 have a PMID while 261,850 do in other
languages. This means at least 430,835 references are journal articles.

What happens when those journal articles lie behind a paywall? The public
suffers from a dearth of good information to make decisions about their
lives as independent citizens and members of a global community.

As founder of The Wikipedia Library, I arranged partnerships with dozens of
leading scholarly journals, to give Wikipedia editors free access to their
reliable content and so they would be able to do effective and rigorous
research. This time-intensive process took 6 years to amass access to only
1/5th of the most highly regarded academic publications. Frankly, Wikipedia
editors--volunteers who selflessly give of their intelligence and passion
to educate--should not have to beg and borrow to access publicly-funded
research. Readers should not hit paywalls when they are seeking
citizen-supported knowledge.

I implore you to make the bold but entirely reasonable decision and ensure
that taxpayers have access to the vital scientific and scholarly studies
that they themselves fund. This is not only sensible, it is essential to
civic health, societal progress, and human flourishing.


Sincerely,
Jake Orlowitz
Founder of The Wikipedia Library


---

"Public Access to Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications, Data and Code
Resulting From Federally Funded Research"

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/19/2020-03189/request-for-information-public-access-to-peer-reviewed-scholarly-publications-data-and-code
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia and a new Wikipedia project

[Peter Southwood]

One of the advantages of this project is that the best of each Wikipedia can be 
used, allowing smaller Wikipedias to concentrate on topics of local interest 
and importance which are not in the other language wikipedias, and these can be 
used in the major wikipedias, expanding their diversity if they meet the 
inclusion criteria.
Another advantage is that the structure of the articles can be engineered to be 
inherently more neutral.
Cheers, 
Peter

-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of 
Denny Vrandecic
Sent: 20 April 2020 17:23
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia and a new 
Wikipedia project

Thank you, Scott,

this is a great and important question. I go into more detail about the
changes to the incentives structures for the contributors in the
Wikipedia @ 20 essay here:

https://wikipedia20.pubpub.org/pub/vyf7ksah

In short: it relies heavily on getting the user experience just right, and
this will be one of the hardest parts of the project. But there are a few
forces that conspire to improve the incentives for the contributors, such
as more reach, making a current and complete Wikipedia in a smaller
language editions seem feasible, reactivating previous contributors, and
tailor a user experience for mobile devices.

In the end, only the future will tell, but I certainly hope that this will
lead to a vibrant and large community with thousands of contributors.

Stay safe,
Denny



On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:54 PM Info WorldUniversity <
i...@worlduniversityandschool.org> wrote:

> Denny, and Wikimedians,
>
> How to maintain the diversity of contributions, edits, individual knowledge
> generators / writers, et al, on the human side of Wikipedia, by many
> different language communities if these were to grow, I wonder? Is this
> already part of your proposal, which I haven't come across yet? Thank you
> for this great development!
>
> Cheers,
> Scott
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 5:49 PM Denny Vrandečić 
> wrote:
>
> > Elevator pitch:
> >
> > Many Wikipedia language editions have large gaps in knowledge. We want to
> > close these gaps by allowing to create and maintain content in one place
> > and allow the Wikipedias to use this content if they choose so, instead
> of
> > doing that in each of the Wikipedia language editions individually. This
> > will allow more people to access and create more knowledge in more
> > languages in the Wikipedias.
> >
> > In order to do this, we need to represent the content in a way that can
> be
> > translated to many different natural languages with high fidelity. We do
> > this by introducing a new project that allows to create, maintain,
> > catalogue and evaluate functions as a new form of knowledge the
> communities
> > work on. This will allow completely new use cases, and allow more people
> to
> > share in more forms of knowledge than today.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 2:48 PM Andy Mabbett 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 01:52, Denny Vrandečić 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > As some of you know, I have been working on the idea of a
> multilingual
> > > > Wikipedia for a few years now.
> > >
> > > What's the elevator pitch for this?
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andy Mabbett
> > > @pigsonthewing
> > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> - Scott MacLeod - Founder & President
> - https://twitter.com/WorldUnivAndSch
> - World University and School
> - http://worlduniversityandschool.org
> - http://scottmacleod.com
>
> - CC World University and School - like CC Wikipedia with best STEM-centric
> CC OpenCourseWare - incorporated as a nonprofit university and school in
> California, and is a U.S. 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt educational organization.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Early thoughts regarding a global code of conduct and a GCC committee

[Philip Kopetzky]

Hi Pine,

I don't think a global commitee would be the right place - stewards are
currently filling this gap involuntarily, and it seems extremely difficult
to judge situations on a local project properly (the Azerbaijani case might
come to mind here).

For me the ideal version of a universal CoC would limit itself to a very
basic foundation, which would then be adapted and developed on a regional
and local level to better fit the needs of the various communities, as you
mention above, including local laws that may prohibit certain behaviour (as
is the case in Germany and Austria with any glorification of
nationalsocialism for example).
The global council would also arbitrate in certain conflicts that happen
between regions or projects, but this is more of a theoretical experiment
right now I think.

Best,
Philip




On Mon, 20 Apr 2020 at 04:37, Pine W  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have published a draft proposal at the bottom of
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Universal_Code_of_Conduct. Discussion
> is welcome.
>
> A difficult issue is how to support diversity of expressions and
> opinions, even when those expressions or opinions may offend others,
> while also supporting civility. At this point, I think that civility
> policies are best left to local communities. However, I welcome
> others' opinions, including alternate proposals.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Proposal towards a multilingual Wikipedia and a new Wikipedia project

[Denny Vrandečić]

Thank you, Scott,

this is a great and important question. I go into more detail about the
changes to the incentives structures for the contributors in the
Wikipedia @ 20 essay here:

https://wikipedia20.pubpub.org/pub/vyf7ksah

In short: it relies heavily on getting the user experience just right, and
this will be one of the hardest parts of the project. But there are a few
forces that conspire to improve the incentives for the contributors, such
as more reach, making a current and complete Wikipedia in a smaller
language editions seem feasible, reactivating previous contributors, and
tailor a user experience for mobile devices.

In the end, only the future will tell, but I certainly hope that this will
lead to a vibrant and large community with thousands of contributors.

Stay safe,
Denny



On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 4:54 PM Info WorldUniversity <
i...@worlduniversityandschool.org> wrote:

> Denny, and Wikimedians,
>
> How to maintain the diversity of contributions, edits, individual knowledge
> generators / writers, et al, on the human side of Wikipedia, by many
> different language communities if these were to grow, I wonder? Is this
> already part of your proposal, which I haven't come across yet? Thank you
> for this great development!
>
> Cheers,
> Scott
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 5:49 PM Denny Vrandečić 
> wrote:
>
> > Elevator pitch:
> >
> > Many Wikipedia language editions have large gaps in knowledge. We want to
> > close these gaps by allowing to create and maintain content in one place
> > and allow the Wikipedias to use this content if they choose so, instead
> of
> > doing that in each of the Wikipedia language editions individually. This
> > will allow more people to access and create more knowledge in more
> > languages in the Wikipedias.
> >
> > In order to do this, we need to represent the content in a way that can
> be
> > translated to many different natural languages with high fidelity. We do
> > this by introducing a new project that allows to create, maintain,
> > catalogue and evaluate functions as a new form of knowledge the
> communities
> > work on. This will allow completely new use cases, and allow more people
> to
> > share in more forms of knowledge than today.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 2:48 PM Andy Mabbett 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 14 Apr 2020 at 01:52, Denny Vrandečić 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > As some of you know, I have been working on the idea of a
> multilingual
> > > > Wikipedia for a few years now.
> > >
> > > What's the elevator pitch for this?
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andy Mabbett
> > > @pigsonthewing
> > > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
>
> --
> - Scott MacLeod - Founder & President
> - https://twitter.com/WorldUnivAndSch
> - World University and School
> - http://worlduniversityandschool.org
> - http://scottmacleod.com
>
> - CC World University and School - like CC Wikipedia with best STEM-centric
> CC OpenCourseWare - incorporated as a nonprofit university and school in
> California, and is a U.S. 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt educational organization.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,