Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Open Source Schools conference, Nottingham, Monday 20th July
2009/7/15 Andrew Turvey : > - "Thomas Dalton" wrote: >> From: "Thomas Dalton" >> To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Sent: Tuesday, 14 July, 2009 16:50:09 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, >> Portugal >> Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Open Source Schools conference, Nottingham, >> Monday 20th July >> >> Great stuff! Take a stack of Wikipedia for Schools CDs (or DVDs, > > I'll try! Hope they arrive on time. You could produce them yourself if they don't. There should be enough in the bank account to buy some blank DVDs. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Open Source Schools conference, Nottingham, Monday 20th July
- "Thomas Dalton" wrote: > From: "Thomas Dalton" > To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Sent: Tuesday, 14 July, 2009 16:50:09 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland, > Portugal > Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Open Source Schools conference, Nottingham, > Monday 20th July > > Great stuff! Take a stack of Wikipedia for Schools CDs (or DVDs, I'll try! Hope they arrive on time. > whatever it's on these days) to hand out. I guess you need to spend > most of the time emphasising how to use Wikipedia properly and that, > if you do use it properly, it is a good research tool so shouldn't be > banned. Yes - I guess primary and secondary school teachers aren't going to be so focused on reliability issues compared to university teachers - but I might be proved wrong! ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Open Source Schools conference, Nottingham, Monday 20th July
Andrew, That sounds great. Good luck! You should definitely do a bit of an ad for the "Schools Project", and say that we're very much interested in working with schools with respect to Wikimedia/Wikipedia. It sounds like they're after something more than just a presentation, if possible - it might be worth just pulling up Wikipedia on the screen, and showing them various parts of it. Hopefully they'll ask you lots of questions... Mike On 14 Jul 2009, at 16:11, Andrew Turvey wrote: > I'm pleased to share with everyone that I've managed to get myself > in as a speaker in the Open Source Schools "un"conference in > Nottingham next Monday 20th July. Although it's primarily focused > on open source software, they have agreed to extend it to talking > about open source content as well. > > I'll be leading a session from 2:05 - 2:35 on the subject of "using > Wikipedia in Schools" > > More details are: > > Session introduction: http://opensourceschools.org.uk/node/11659 > Conference programme: http://opensourceschools.org.uk/unconference09 > Venue: http://www.ncsl.org.uk/lcc-map.pdf > > If you are able to come along please do - it runs from 10-4 at a > venue near Nottingham University. The cost is free for all school > and local authority staff and presenters and £55 for others. The > key note speakers are George Auckland, Head of Learning Innovation > at BBC Learning and Graham Attwell, Director of Pontydysgu, an e- > learning company. > > Please spread the word and please let me have any suggestions for > the kinds of things I should cover. > > Regards, > > Andrew ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
[Wikimediauk-l] Wikinews' article on the National Portrait Gallery threat
Wikinews has its article up for review. It should be published and in Google News pretty much as-is. http://tinyurl.com/WN-NPG It is quote long and mindful of the discussion over the weekend. Brian. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Private schools charity threat
2009/7/14 Gordon Joly : > > This story was in the news today. Seems "education" ain't wot is used > to be... and neither is charity. > > ** > > Charity rules now mean private schools have to prove "public benefit" That's hardly news, the rules changed a while back and the private schools were complaining then. (I guess the change may be just coming into force.) It shouldn't make any difference to us, though. We are clearly in the public benefit, it's the education bit the HMRC was contesting, if memory serves. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue and be damned" FOI to NPG
Heh, I never really liked automatic e-mail signatures before Wikipedia. But now I use one just to stop me signing off messages with four tildes :-) Pete / the wub 2009/7/14 sineWAVE > > > That's worth a few wikipediholism points, I'm sure. Maybe you could > get a greasemonkey script to convert wikimarkup on non-wiki sites to > appropriate formatting. That'd be cool. > > > > --- On Sun, 12/7/09, Peter Coombe wrote: > > > >> From: Peter Coombe > >> Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue and be damned" FOI to > NPG > >> To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> Date: Sunday, 12 July, 2009, 11:18 AM > >> But even if FOI is deemed to apply to > >> photographs of artwork, they could release the files and > >> still maintain their claim of copyright > >> http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/yourRights/index.htm#receive > >> > >> > >> They could also claim commercial interest (IMO reasonably) > >> as a reason not to comply with such a FOI request, but this > >> is at least tested against the public interest. > >> http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/yourRights/exemptions.htm#43 > >> > >> > >> Pete / the wub > >> > >> > >> > >> 2009/7/12 Dahsun > >> > >> > >> > >> I agree that the WMUK shouldn't get directly involved, > >> but if without making any reference to the case in hand they > >> request the same information under the FOI then I would have > >> thought they were indirectly rather than directly involved. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> As for whether the FOI has an exemption for artwork, well > >> I'd be interested in what the lawyers have to say on > >> this as there is some legalese in the legislation that I > >> can't get my head around. > >> > >> > >> > >> However the National Portrait Gallery has its own handy > http://www.npg.org.uk/about/foi.php > >> section on FOI, and I don't read that as containing any > >> substantial claim of exemption from the Act for the gallery. > >> They also have some fine objectives including "the > >> provision of access to the national collection of portraits > >> for all sections of the population" but reassuringly > >> not "the restriction of access to the national > >> collection of portraits only to those who can visit the > >> gallery in person" or "maximising of the > >> commercial use of the images" > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> --- On Sat, 11/7/09, David Gerard > >> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> > From: David Gerard > >> > >> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue > >> and be damned" FOI to NPG > >> > >> > To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org > >> > >> > Date: Saturday, 11 July, 2009, 1:00 PM > >> > >> > 2009/7/11 Dahsun : > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Perhaps the air would be slightly clearer if > >> Wikimedia > >> > >> > UK were to make Freedom of Information Act requests to > >> the > >> > >> > NPG and other Publicly funded galleries for the > >> highest def > >> > >> > digital photos they have available of any artworks in > >> their > >> > >> > possession. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > WMUK getting directly involved in this would be very > >> bad > >> > >> > for WMUK's > >> > >> > (legal) perceived separation from WMF. Of course, > >> WMUK > >> > >> > could > >> > >> > meaningfully comment that "claiming copyright on > >> something > >> > >> > four > >> > >> > hundred years old is more than a little odious - > >> it's not > >> > >> > like the > >> > >> > painter will paint another painting if only th NPG can > >> make > >> > >> > legal > >> > >> > threats." > >> > >> > > >> > >> > That said, your approach is most certainly > >> particularly > >> > >> > amusing :-D I > >> > >> > expect they'd claim these were commercial works > >> and the > >> > >> > core of their > >> > >> > business or somesuch. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > - d. > >> > >> > > >> > >> > ___ > >> > >> > Wikimedia UK mailing list > >> > >> > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > >> > >> > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > >> > >> > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> > >> Wikimedia UK mailing list > >> > >> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > >> > >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > >> > >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> -Inline Attachment Follows- > >> > >> ___ > >> Wikimedia UK mailing list > >> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > >> > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia UK mailing list > > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > > > > > > -- > 1001010 100100011111011001101100 > > ___ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Open Source Schools conference, Nottingham, Monday 20th July
Great stuff! Take a stack of Wikipedia for Schools CDs (or DVDs, whatever it's on these days) to hand out. I guess you need to spend most of the time emphasising how to use Wikipedia properly and that, if you do use it properly, it is a good research tool so shouldn't be banned. 2009/7/14 Andrew Turvey : > I'm pleased to share with everyone that I've managed to get myself in as a > speaker in the Open Source Schools "un"conference in Nottingham next Monday > 20th July. Although it's primarily focused on open source software, they > have agreed to extend it to talking about open source content as well. > > I'll be leading a session from 2:05 - 2:35 on the subject of "using > Wikipedia in Schools" > > More details are: > > Session introduction: http://opensourceschools.org.uk/node/11659 > Conference programme: http://opensourceschools.org.uk/unconference09 > Venue: http://www.ncsl.org.uk/lcc-map.pdf > > If you are able to come along please do - it runs from 10-4 at a venue near > Nottingham University. The cost is free for all school and local authority > staff and presenters and £55 for others. The key note speakers are George > Auckland, Head of Learning Innovation at BBC Learning and Graham Attwell, > Director of Pontydysgu, an e-learning company. > > Please spread the word and please let me have any suggestions for the kinds > of things I should cover. > > Regards, > > Andrew > > ___ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > > ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue and be damned" FOI to NPG
> That's worth a few wikipediholism points, I'm sure. Maybe you could get a greasemonkey script to convert wikimarkup on non-wiki sites to appropriate formatting. That'd be cool. > > --- On Sun, 12/7/09, Peter Coombe wrote: > >> From: Peter Coombe >> Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue and be damned" FOI to NPG >> To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Date: Sunday, 12 July, 2009, 11:18 AM >> But even if FOI is deemed to apply to >> photographs of artwork, they could release the files and >> still maintain their claim of copyright >> http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/yourRights/index.htm#receive >> >> >> They could also claim commercial interest (IMO reasonably) >> as a reason not to comply with such a FOI request, but this >> is at least tested against the public interest. >> http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/yourRights/exemptions.htm#43 >> >> >> Pete / the wub >> >> >> >> 2009/7/12 Dahsun >> >> >> >> I agree that the WMUK shouldn't get directly involved, >> but if without making any reference to the case in hand they >> request the same information under the FOI then I would have >> thought they were indirectly rather than directly involved. >> >> >> >> >> As for whether the FOI has an exemption for artwork, well >> I'd be interested in what the lawyers have to say on >> this as there is some legalese in the legislation that I >> can't get my head around. >> >> >> >> However the National Portrait Gallery has its own handy >> http://www.npg.org.uk/about/foi.php >> section on FOI, and I don't read that as containing any >> substantial claim of exemption from the Act for the gallery. >> They also have some fine objectives including "the >> provision of access to the national collection of portraits >> for all sections of the population" but reassuringly >> not "the restriction of access to the national >> collection of portraits only to those who can visit the >> gallery in person" or "maximising of the >> commercial use of the images" >> >> >> >> >> --- On Sat, 11/7/09, David Gerard >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > From: David Gerard >> >> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue >> and be damned" FOI to NPG >> >> > To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> > Date: Saturday, 11 July, 2009, 1:00 PM >> >> > 2009/7/11 Dahsun : >> >> > >> >> > > Perhaps the air would be slightly clearer if >> Wikimedia >> >> > UK were to make Freedom of Information Act requests to >> the >> >> > NPG and other Publicly funded galleries for the >> highest def >> >> > digital photos they have available of any artworks in >> their >> >> > possession. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > WMUK getting directly involved in this would be very >> bad >> >> > for WMUK's >> >> > (legal) perceived separation from WMF. Of course, >> WMUK >> >> > could >> >> > meaningfully comment that "claiming copyright on >> something >> >> > four >> >> > hundred years old is more than a little odious - >> it's not >> >> > like the >> >> > painter will paint another painting if only th NPG can >> make >> >> > legal >> >> > threats." >> >> > >> >> > That said, your approach is most certainly >> particularly >> >> > amusing :-D I >> >> > expect they'd claim these were commercial works >> and the >> >> > core of their >> >> > business or somesuch. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > - d. >> >> > >> >> > ___ >> >> > Wikimedia UK mailing list >> >> > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org >> >> > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> >> > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> >> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> >> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org >> >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >> >> >> >> >> -Inline Attachment Follows- >> >> ___ >> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org >> > > > > > ___ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > -- 1001010 100100011111011001101100 ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
[Wikimediauk-l] Private schools charity threat
This story was in the news today. Seems "education" ain't wot is used to be... and neither is charity. ** Charity rules now mean private schools have to prove "public benefit" Independent schools in England are protesting about "too narrow" rules for charitable status - as two out of five test-case schools fail to qualify. The loss of charitable status threatens tax benefits for independent schools. The Independent Schools Council says the rulings rely too much on the number of bursaries, with fees likely to have to rise to fund subsidised places. The Charity Commission says charities must "demonstrate how they bring real benefit to the public". * Full story at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8148347.stm Gordon -- "Think Feynman"/ http://pobox.com/~gordo/ gordon.j...@pobox.com/// ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue and be damned" FOI to NPG
If the NPG were a governmenet agency with a remit to maximise the commercial value of its information then I could understand that it would claim the commercial exemption from FOI. But their remit is to make their collection available to the Public and they object to us helping them do that? I'm not sure what "This exemption is public interest tested." means, but I'd like to think that we could dispute any attempt by them to restrict Public access to the photos of the paintings that they are looking after and supposedly displaying to the public. --- On Sun, 12/7/09, Peter Coombe wrote: > From: Peter Coombe > Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue and be damned" FOI to NPG > To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Date: Sunday, 12 July, 2009, 11:18 AM > But even if FOI is deemed to apply to > photographs of artwork, they could release the files and > still maintain their claim of copyright > http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/yourRights/index.htm#receive > > > They could also claim commercial interest (IMO reasonably) > as a reason not to comply with such a FOI request, but this > is at least tested against the public interest. > http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/yourRights/exemptions.htm#43 > > > Pete / the wub > > > > 2009/7/12 Dahsun > > > > I agree that the WMUK shouldn't get directly involved, > but if without making any reference to the case in hand they > request the same information under the FOI then I would have > thought they were indirectly rather than directly involved. > > > > > As for whether the FOI has an exemption for artwork, well > I'd be interested in what the lawyers have to say on > this as there is some legalese in the legislation that I > can't get my head around. > > > > However the National Portrait Gallery has its own handy > http://www.npg.org.uk/about/foi.php > section on FOI, and I don't read that as containing any > substantial claim of exemption from the Act for the gallery. > They also have some fine objectives including "the > provision of access to the national collection of portraits > for all sections of the population" but reassuringly > not "the restriction of access to the national > collection of portraits only to those who can visit the > gallery in person" or "maximising of the > commercial use of the images" > > > > > --- On Sat, 11/7/09, David Gerard > wrote: > > > > > From: David Gerard > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [Foundation-l] "sue > and be damned" FOI to NPG > > > To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org > > > Date: Saturday, 11 July, 2009, 1:00 PM > > > 2009/7/11 Dahsun : > > > > > > > Perhaps the air would be slightly clearer if > Wikimedia > > > UK were to make Freedom of Information Act requests to > the > > > NPG and other Publicly funded galleries for the > highest def > > > digital photos they have available of any artworks in > their > > > possession. > > > > > > > > > WMUK getting directly involved in this would be very > bad > > > for WMUK's > > > (legal) perceived separation from WMF. Of course, > WMUK > > > could > > > meaningfully comment that "claiming copyright on > something > > > four > > > hundred years old is more than a little odious - > it's not > > > like the > > > painter will paint another painting if only th NPG can > make > > > legal > > > threats." > > > > > > That said, your approach is most certainly > particularly > > > amusing :-D I > > > expect they'd claim these were commercial works > and the > > > core of their > > > business or somesuch. > > > > > > > > > - d. > > > > > > ___ > > > Wikimedia UK mailing list > > > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > > > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > > > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___ > > Wikimedia UK mailing list > > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > > > > > -Inline Attachment Follows- > > ___ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
[Wikimediauk-l] Open Source Schools conference, Nottingham, Monday 20th July
I'm pleased to share with everyone that I've managed to get myself in as a speaker in the Open Source Schools "un"conference in Nottingham next Monday 20th July. Although it's primarily focused on open source software, they have agreed to extend it to talking about open source content as well. I'll be leading a session from 2:05 - 2:35 on the subject of "using Wikipedia in Schools" More details are: Session introduction: http://opensourceschools.org.uk/node/11659 Conference programme: http://opensourceschools.org.uk/unconference09 Venue: http://www.ncsl.org.uk/lcc-map.pdf If you are able to come along please do - it runs from 10-4 at a venue near Nottingham University. The cost is free for all school and local authority staff and presenters and £55 for others. The key note speakers are George Auckland , Head of Learning Innovation at BBC Learning and Graham Attwell , Director of Pontydysgu , an e-learning company. Please spread the word and please let me have any suggestions for the kinds of things I should cover. Regards, Andrew ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] FW: National Portrait Gallery threat oflegalaction
I think I'd take more issue with their ineptness at trying to get a Wikimedia comment. Nothing from them as far as I'm aware. Brian. -Original Message- From: wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Sam Blacketer Sent: 14 July 2009 12:41 To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] FW: National Portrait Gallery threat oflegalaction It's got in the Evening Standard today: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23719265-details/National+Por trait+Gallery+sues+Wikipedia+over+copyright/article.do I think Jimbo might complain about their spelling mistake over his self-description ... -- Sam Blacketer ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] FW: National Portrait Gallery threat of legalaction
It's got in the Evening Standard today: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23719265-details/National+Portrait+Gallery+sues+Wikipedia+over+copyright/article.do I think Jimbo might complain about their spelling mistake over his self-description ... -- Sam Blacketer ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
