Re: [Wikimediauk-l] First-ever Newcastle meetup
On Jul 27, 2013 11:33 PM, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 27 July 2013 12:38, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 26 July 2013 19:00, HJ Mitchell hjmitch...@ymail.com wrote: Newcastle Which one? ;-) Dunno. Andy, let's make a deal. You go to under-Lyme and I'll go to upon Tyne. Ugh; we've already had a few meetups in the seventh largest city in Oz. http://enwp.org/wp:meetup/Newcastle :) -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Greyham Dawes co-opted to the Board of Wikimedia UK
Thanks Chris for the context, some of which appears to have been omitted from the governance review. I am a bit surprised by that. I'm guessing that Greyham didn't respond to the call to the community ;-) How many responses did you receive from the advert in the Third Sector? -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Greyham Dawes co-opted to the Board of Wikimedia UK
Im not seeing full details, like the process used to identify Dawes. John Vandenberg. sent from Galaxy Note On Feb 16, 2013 2:58 AM, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Hello everyone, I'm happy to let you know that Greyham Dawes has been co-opted to the Wikimedia UK Board of Trustees. Greyham has also been appointed Treasurer. You can find full details, and some information about Greyham, on our blog herehttp://blog.wikimedia.org.uk/2013/02/greyham-dawes-joins-the-wikimedia-uk-board/ . Thanks and regards, Stevie -- Stevie Benton Communications Organiser Wikimedia UK+44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173 @StevieBenton Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents.* ___ 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] Where are we with QRpedia?
Thanks Stevie. On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 9:07 PM, Stevie Benton stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: Thanks Andreas and John. I'll get corrections made ASAP. Stevie On Jan 31, 2013 7:59 AM, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: Freopedia is spelt wrong. John Vandenberg. sent from Galaxy Note On Jan 31, 2013 6:34 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: There is an article on Wales Online today, Wikipedia: How a project launched in Monmouth has gone global, that requires some corrections. ---o0o--- Roger Bamkin is director of Wikimedia UK. Wikimedia is the body that operates Wikipedia. Read more: Wales Online http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/need-to-read/2013/01/31/wikipedia-how-a-project-launched-in-monmouth-has-gone-global-91466-32713327/#ixzz2JXIb7GFQ ---o0o--- Andreas On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Joe Filceolaire filceola...@gmail.com wrote: Jon It does seem extraordinary that nobody seems able to write out a summary of what these arguments are. We are not asking for this information because we think it will lead to an acceptable agreement more quickly; we are asking because we want to know what is being done on our behalf. Joe On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: On 21/01/13 17:10, Jon Davies wrote: However I do not think an acceptable agreement will come any more quickly if we rehearse the many and complicated arguments on this list. How did we get get here then? Gordo ___ 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 ___ 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 ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Where are we with QRpedia?
Freopedia is spelt wrong. John Vandenberg. sent from Galaxy Note On Jan 31, 2013 6:34 PM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote: There is an article on Wales Online today, Wikipedia: How a project launched in Monmouth has gone global, that requires some corrections. ---o0o--- Roger Bamkin is director of Wikimedia UK. Wikimedia is the body that operates Wikipedia. Read more: Wales Online http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/need-to-read/2013/01/31/wikipedia-how-a-project-launched-in-monmouth-has-gone-global-91466-32713327/#ixzz2JXIb7GFQ ---o0o--- Andreas On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Joe Filceolaire filceola...@gmail.comwrote: Jon It does seem extraordinary that nobody seems able to write out a summary of what these arguments are. We are not asking for this information because we think it will lead to an acceptable agreement more quickly; we are asking because we want to know what is being done on our behalf. Joe On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 9:06 PM, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.comwrote: On 21/01/13 17:10, Jon Davies wrote: However I do not think an acceptable agreement will come any more quickly if we rehearse the many and complicated arguments on this list. How did we get get here then? Gordo __**_ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-lhttp://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 ___ 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] Proposal of trustees collective responsibility
Was this resignation offer and decision minuted publicly? John Vandenberg. sent from Galaxy Note On Oct 8, 2012 6:22 PM, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote: For their reasons, of course. A claim of protection implies a wilful act. On Oct 8, 2012 12:15 PM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On Oct 8, 2012 11:43 AM, James Farrar james.far...@gmail.com wrote: Do *you* have any evidence for that? For their actions, or their reasons? Their actions are pretty clear to anyone that has been following the situations. I'm speculating about their reasons. ___ 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 ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
[Wikimediauk-l] Fwd: RE: ::HOPAU:: Updating London Paralympics Wikipedia sites
Congrats to the UK wikimedians keeping wikipedia up to date. If you notice anything that needs updating for Australians, email the HOPAU mailing list ( ho...@googlegroups.com ) to handball it to our team. Is anyone focusing on keeping China's results up to date? In Chinese Wikipedia too? John Vandenberg. sent from Galaxy Note -- Forwarded message -- From: greg.bl...@bigpond.com Date: Sep 1, 2012 9:27 AM Subject: RE: ::HOPAU:: Updating London Paralympics Wikipedia sites To: ho...@googlegroups.com Just a quick note . I'm updating the following pages during the Games - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_at_the_2012_Summer_Paralympics - adding medallists and number of medallists per sport at the end of each day Australian Paralympians pages - updating their Medal Records each day and adding categories such as Paralympic gold medallists for Australia. After the Games, there will need to added cited text that summarises their performances in London. I thought this should be done after the Games due to the enormous amount of work this entails. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_at_the_Paralympics#Leading_Australian _Summer_Paralympians_1960-2012http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia_at_the_Paralympics#Leading_Australian_Summer_Paralympians_1960-2012- updating Matt Cowdrey's record. Kieran Modra will be added to the list if he wins another gold. The Great Britain site is an example of detailed results - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Britain_at_the_2012_Summer_Paralympics Sorry I don't have time to provide this level of detail - another HOPAU may be able to help. Greg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Status of this list and its archives
Thank you James, and the other list admins. -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [WMUK Board] Statement regarding Ashley Van Haeften, Chair of Wikimedia UK
The wmf mission is really broad http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Mission_statement On Aug 1, 2012 11:03 PM, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: Does the Foundation have a view? They should, since the Chapter is a part of the Foundation. We're a chapter of the Foundation, we're not part of it. The mission of the organisation must be in line with the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation. Source: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requirements_for_future_chapters That's where I get stuck. The UK Chapter's mission must toe the party line Gordo ___ 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] [WMUK Board] Statement regarding Ashley Van Haeften, Chair of Wikimedia UK
On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 8:06 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 1 August 2012 01:52, Andrew West andrewcw...@gmail.com wrote: On 31 July 2012 13:17, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: Predictably, the story is starting to spread: http://news.google.co.uk/news/story?gl=ukpz=1cf=allned=ukhl=enq=wikimedia+ukncl=drcm1dj39Jz4CfMo-tJUD6HkAFEPMcf=allscoring=d And equally predictably: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashley_van_Haeften There are some notability concerns there... I haven't tagged the article, but I've left a note on the talk page. I've also noticed the issue is now getting international coverage: http://www.actualitte.com/acteurs-numeriques/le-president-de-wikimedia-uk-banni-pour-violation-des-regles-de-wikipedia-35722.htm Ugh, I think it has several aspects wrong, like asserting that Jimbo also banned/agreed with the ban of Ashley from en.wp, rather than banning Ashley from his talk page before the ArbCom decision. I have no idea what that site is, and don't speak French, but it shows up on Google News. It doesnt look very notable, with 156 hits across all Wikipedias https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=%22Actualitte.com%22+site%3Awikipedia.org -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [WMUK Board] Statement regarding Ashley Van Haeften, Chair of Wikimedia UK
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 9:28 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 July 2012 00:26, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l says its a private list It says: This is a private list, which means that the list of members is not available to non-members. That is a very specific meaning of private. It only refers to the list of members and, since anyone can subscribe and then see the list, it really isn't very private at all. (I don't know why the list is private - it should be made public since there is no purpose served by having it be private.) It isn't public. The software considers it private. Emails to the list can be claimed to have been sent under the assumption that it isn't going to be published on the web. This was previously discussed in thread List archives from March 29 to April 11, where list admin UK trustee Mike Peel promised to restore the list to being a public list in three days (i.e. April 14) after he had removed any problematic emails.(7b53a90e-3a36-4737-be50-fc23295f0...@wikimedia.org.uk) This was followed by Fae saying he would unsubscribe if it was restored to being a public list.(CAHRYMYXVd0RkFduwVYRjoth=bb8ap3dlnf87jv+_50furcg...@mail.gmail.com) -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] What is in a name?
All chapters are called either 'Wikimedia', 'Wiki' or 'free culture'. On 6/13/12, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: At last, the company (a registered charity) is now called Wikimedia UK. The name was changed from Wiki UK Ltd. A former version of the project was called Wiki Educational Resources Ltd which is a rather apt name given the current interest in training. This company was dissolved in 2009. It does not appear to have ever submitted any accounts. Company No. 05708269 Status: Dissolved 31/03/2009 Date of Incorporation: 14/02/2006 Why choose the name wikimedia when the public are in general much more familiar with the term wikipedia? Are we guilty of being to close the issue and not seeing the wider picture (but that was was given as the reason for the formal name change at the AGM???)? Is there now time to reflect? I know something of the trademark issues, and I know something about the relationship to the Foundation. Compare and contrast:- 1) Wikipedia 2) Wikimedia 3) Mediawiki Gordo ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] What is in a name?
On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 5:07 PM, Harry Burt harryab...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 10:45 AM, HJ Mitchell hjmitch...@ymail.com wrote: despite it not having the same 'brand' recognition as the movement's flagship project. Its a feature, not a bug. We promote our content more than we promote ourselves. SOFIXIT :P No seriously, that's probably the answer, longterm. IMO it is good that our organisation brand is not 'Wikipedia'. I usually tell people that Wikipedia is our first and most famous project, and we are the quiet workers behind the projects. And we have been building more projects, and they are going to be just as good and popular as Wikipedia. -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] OpenDomesday links
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 2:38 AM, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: On 16 May 2012 17:24, Fae fae...@gmail.com wrote: On 16 May 2012 17:13, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: Cool. How are you sourcing entries? It's nasty and weak, I'm only picking up image pages that mention Domesday Book. Luckily this seems to be quite a few, but in no way will be exhaustive or guaranteed to be fully accurate. NB that Domesday survey also works. (Not a synonym! Interesting but off-topic here.) Note that WIkisource has a portal for the survey, with scans https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Portal:Domesday_survey#Victoria_County_History e.g. https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:VCH_Bedfordshire_1.djvu/245 -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Post AGM pub
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:00 AM, HJ Mitchell hjmitch...@ymail.com wrote: Well as long as there's decent beer involved, I'm in. You'd have to come down under for that .. ;-) -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Post AGM pub
haha. Even Fosters is better than the stuff you lot drink. :P On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 10:41 PM, Richard Symonds richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: We have Fosters in pubs here too John ;-) /obligatory winding up the Australians Richard Symonds On 10 May 2012 13:39, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 1:00 AM, HJ Mitchell hjmitch...@ymail.com wrote: Well as long as there's decent beer involved, I'm in. You'd have to come down under for that .. ;-) -- John Vandenberg ___ 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 -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Olympic mascots on Commons
this should be a public community discussion. nominated for deletion. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Olympic_mascots.jpg On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 1:51 AM, Tom Morris t...@tommorris.org wrote: On Tuesday, 1 May 2012 at 16:45, Richard Symonds wrote: Perhaps I should rephrase my previous nonsensical reply: Is this really OGL? I suppose it is, but the Flickr account seems to think it's non-commercial... Yes. It's published by the DCMS, and according to their website, it's Crown Copyright, and thus under the terms of the PSI Framework, is OGL. http://www.dcms.gov.uk/copyright.aspx http://www.dcms.gov.uk/7085.aspx#Flickr_policy There's no indication on the Flickr page that it is owned by anyone other than the DCMS, and thus we have good reason to believe it's covered by the OGL. There is an existing license on the Flickr images, and reusers are free to reuse it under CC BY-NC-ND if they feel so inclined. But we've had other OGL images from other government departments that are also licensed on Flickr as some variant of CC that's not Commons compatible. The DCMS are aware though, through Twitter and email. As are James Forrester and various other people who grok OGL. -- Tom Morris http://tommorris.org/ ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Role accounts
I dont know whether this is what Richard and his friend were discussing, but the MonmouthMuseumWales RFC has closed https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/User_namesoldid=489718366#MonmouthMuseumWales https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Rewarding_Incomptence.3F I have often faced this issue during training workshops. The most recent example can be seen here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CityLibraries_Townsvilleaction=history (it started in userspace) Thankfully nobody blocked the accounts during the training. Over lunch I explained the reasoning behind our username policy and they instantly understood why it was a bad idea to use institutional names. They created new accounts after lunch. ;-) However no everyone has experts to talk to at lunch. Instant blocks for such a trivial problem are stupid. We should give orgname accounts a few days to select a new username and jump through the hoops. On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Richard Symonds chasemew...@gmail.com wrote: All, Me and a close friend were having a rather heated debate tonight on the topic of role accounts, and I am hoping you (as a community) can answer my question: Why do we ban role accounts? I was of the understanding that it was something to do with copyright/legal issues, but it's been a few years since I passed RfA, and I'm struggling to remember the arguments that I once remembered so well. I had a trawl through all the appropriate pages on meta and enwp, and although I could find out that role accounts were blocked, I couldn't see the justification behind it mentioned anywhere I'm not disagreeing with the policy, but I was wondering if anyone knew the reasoning behind it - and why said reasoning isn't included in the policy pages? All the best, Chase ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] [GLAM] Soldiers' letters
On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Roger Bamkin victuall...@gmail.com wrote: On a more mundane point we have been asked to supply Wikisource via QRpedia mundane!?! .. very cool! ;-) -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] SOPA/PROTECT Blackout
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Gordon Joly gordon.j...@pobox.com wrote: On 17/01/2012 15:28, Alison M. Wheeler wrote: Also, given that even .UK .IT .NO and all the rest of the ccTLDs refer back to the dozen of so root DNS servers, they too could be poisened under the draft bill as it exists. So make no bones about it, these proposals *will* affect just about every country in the world if they go through. AlisonW So who owns the Internet? Who has ultimate authority over DNS? Nobody owns the Internet. DNS is distributed. The US is the manager of the root zone. Every user can choose which DNS server they consider authoritative. There are options, like Google and OpenDNS. https://code.google.com/speed/public-dns/docs/using.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDNS Every ISP can choose who they use as the authority of DNS resolutions. Every operating system can use deploy a new DNS resolution authority. Every web-browser could override the default DNS resolution provided by the operating system. All of the above currently choose to accept the US managed DNS root zone as the authority, but only because the US govt has not tried to interfere. It would be a shock to the Internet infrastructure if we needed to select a new manager, but it would hardly be noticed by the average end-user. -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] World Wars project
On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Brian McNeil brian.mcn...@wikinewsie.org wrote: Chris, I assume Fae has mentioned to you that the National Archives of Scotland might be interested in doing something around soldiers' wills? As-opposed to a more formal last will and testament, these documents are a final letter to loved once to be delivered if they were killed. Along with each, their CO would have returned personal effects which might include items like ticket stubs for a theatre show seen the night before they went to the front. How, and where in the family, this could work with Wikimedia projects is what I'm not entirely sure on. Commons, and Wikisource, would be the place to start. IMO, any text held by a national archive should be within the scope of Wikisource. Most texts will fit within the current English Wikisource policy, but it could be expanded a bit by relying on the selection process of external organisations. http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/WS:WWI#Documentary_sources On Mon, 2011-10-17 at 15:35 +0100, Chris Keating wrote: I see from the 2012 activity plan that there's a budget for a World Wars project [1]. Is there a leader for this? An online presence? Hello! :-) The short answer is Yes, sort of, me. And no, not yet. And I would love to speak to you about it (and to anyone else interested in what we can do with the World War I centenary). The longer answer is; There is a really big opportunity both for Wikimedia UK and indeed the whole movement connected to the World War I centenary. For a period of about 4 years there's going to be increased public interest in this area. Around some key dates the number of people researching World War I topics on Wikipedia (everyone from primary-school children to journalists) will be massive. What's more, pretty much every museum and archive in the country which has any relevant collections is going to be doing *something* related to World War I in 2014. Further - it's not just us - this is a massive global event; 2014 is a major centenary for almost every European nation and lots of non-European ones. This is something I've long had in mind - a couple of years ago I started the Great War Centennial project on-wiki, which was then incorporated into the Military History Wikiproject. However, it didn't get very far (particularly not compared to the Battleships wikiproject). Since I've been on the Board, I have been very gradually making contacts both within Wikimedia (including the military history wikiproject) and with potential partner institutions about what Wikimedia UK could do in this regard. I know Milhist is up for doing more outreach, indeed one of the Milhist coordinators is is UK-based and has been contacting the Ministry of Defence about releasing more of their material under the Open Government License, which is great. The budget we've put in for 2012 could yet be spent in a number of different ways. And I hope this won't just be a 2012 activity - I would like to see us make this an ongoing area of activity, certainly to 2014, quite possibly beyond. I am keen to move this further, though I don't have much time spare until the New Year as I'm mainly occupied on the Fundraiser. So at the moment I'm mainly collating interested parties, with a view to getting a core group of Wikimedians together who want to shape what we do with this, and a core group of partner institutions, and putting the two groups together in a room in January or February and seeing what they come up with in terms of inspiration for the period 2012-2014. Some (but not all) of the decisions about how the WW1/WW2 allocation in 2012 budget is spent will already have been taken by then, but not all of them, and as I say I think the 2012 budget figure is a beginning not an end. If anyone's interested in this, please wave :-) I can be persuaded to invest in and read some books, although if the books were to come out of the budget and then be placed in Wikimedia UKs hands afterwards that would be preferable. We can already handle support investment in books, via the Microgrant scheme: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Microgrants Thanks, Chris ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org Brian McNeil. -- http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Brian_McNeil - Accredited Reporter. Facts don't cease to be facts, but news ceases to be news. ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] National Maritime Museum Collaboration
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Chris Keating chriskeatingw...@gmail.com wrote: Good point. I don't suppose you know how many of them are British *war*ships? Caw. You're hard to please. Here are a few http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/StateLibQld_royal_navy http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Search/StateLibQld_British -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Re: [Wikimediauk-l] National Maritime Museum Collaboration
On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 1:18 AM, Chris Keating chriskeatingw...@gmail.com wrote: I'm very pleased to say that our long-planned collaboration with the National Maritime Museum is now happening. They have released a lot of info from their internal research on Royal Navy warships on their website: http://www.nmm.ac.uk/researchers/research-areas-and-projects/warship-histories/ (it says CC-BY-NC but the NC bit is a typo and will soon be corrected) I've set up a project page for this on-wiki, please do have a look and join in :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/NMM Fantastic. Has someone notified the WP Ships project? The State Library of Queensland collaboration resulted in 5000 images of ships being uploaded to Commons, and a lot of these are UK ships. see https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships/Archive_25#5000_images_uploaded and https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships#Mass_NARA_image_upload -- John Vandenberg ___ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
