On 08/09/11 01:52, emijrp wrote:
Michael S. Hart has died http://www.gutenberg.org/wiki/Michael_S._Hart
To save time to some other peoples:
Michael S. Hart is the founder of Project Gutenberg. A project to
makes public domain books available in electronic format.
Bio on wikipedia:
On 08/09/11 03:14, John Vandenberg wrote:
Are there are pages on English Wikipedia that should be classified as PG?
PG rating is a point of view. It breaches our constitution to remains
neutral :-)
--
Ashar Voultoiz
___
foundation-l mailing list
On 8 September 2011 01:57, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:43 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 7 September 2011 17:32, John Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
Every version of Mozilla has included the Dont load images option.
And it is simple to
*Objecting to this isn't a question of being prudish or of censorship, or
of being anti-wiki. But if we want to attract (...) women
editors, editors from outside the majority cultures on Wikipedia (...) this
kind of thing is obviously very off-putting. So we risk limiting our reach
by not
Greetings,
I am Nitika working for the Wikipedia India Education Program. As some of
you may know, as a part of the program we are working with teachers and
students to encourage Wikipedia in the classroom. The basic idea is that
teachers ask their students to edit Wikipedia articles instead of
On Tue, 6 Sep 2011 10:45:41 -0700, R.Stuart Geiger sgei...@gmail.com
wrote:
Thanks for the interest, John! I put the list of the top 250 up at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Most_wanted_articles -- but I
didn't exactly publicize it. I guess this is my chance to do so now!
Also, a
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
I remember once at the local college library, Adams State, in Alamosa,
that they had Girl on a Swing in the children's collection.
At my secondary school library (er, I think that's 'high school' for
the US equivalent)
I just read the list of comments and i have quite some questions and
answers:
1. Is Wikipedia comparable to library?
It is right to say that we create the content on our own. But is this
really true in the first meaning? We don't invent/introduce facts, we
collect and display them. We don't
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 01:24:27PM +1000, John Vandenberg wrote:
Hi Kim,
I think you might be more interested in looking at the same question
from another perspective.
Oh, right, sorry. I knew it was a bad idea to post at 5:00 AM. ^^;;
If Wikipedia is a quality encyclopedia, most rating
JFI...
I Just finish upload about 15 videos you our channel on youtube. the editor
is working on the rest of them, and we uploading them (again, very heavy
files..). As I said, I hope that until of the month we will finish edit,
upload, and tag them..
http://www.youtube.com/WikimediaIL
Itzik
I thought folks might be interested in this, which was created by
Moving Brands as a hypothetical project for rebnranding Wikimedia, and
published in Viewpoint Magazine in the UK:
http://www.movingbrands.com/?category_name=wikipedia-work
Note the very elaborate work on this, and the particular
--- On Wed, 7/9/11, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
The closest we could come to a neutral filtering system is an easily
accessible on/off switch for images.
On Thursdy, 08. sep 2011 07:56 Andreas Kolbe jayen...@yahoo.com
[mailto:jayen...@yahoo.com]
wrote:
Actually, that is
Wow. looks really interesting Pharos. It seems they incorporated a lot of
the project philosophy in the re-branding.
Also, I don't know if the UI they have on the Macbook is part of it or not,
but it all looks great.
Theo
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:34 PM, Pharos pharosofalexand...@gmail.com
This proposal was around for a long time inside the discussion pages of
the referendum itself. It would have many positive arguments:
* Truly neutral
* Easy to implement
* No time spend (lost) on sorting images
* No editwars about categorization
I would support this solution. But I'm strongly
Does rebranding change anything then the name or appearance?
Or better asked: Does it help to solve any of our real problems?
I might compare this to throwing cat's around. A rather useless feature,
since anyone knows how to edit and a personal message worth 100% more
then a template.
and:
*the only solution to give parents a real possibility to protect their
kids against images on Wikipedia, which they consider inappropriate for
them.
Sir48/Thyge
- Original meddelelse -
Fra: Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com
Til: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Does rebranding change anything then the name or appearance?
Or better asked: Does it help to solve any of our real problems?
I might compare this to throwing cat's around. A rather useless feature,
since anyone knows how to edit and a personal message worth 100% more
then a template.
No, that wouldn't/shouldn't still be possible. Any image can be made
visible while the parents are away for some minutes. But as usual: No
filter can replace the guidance trough parents. It's a parents job to
explain their own kids how the world works.
Tobias Oelgarte
Am 08.09.2011 16:54,
Am 08.09.2011 16:59, schrieb Chris Keating:
Does rebranding change anything then the name or appearance?
Or better asked: Does it help to solve any of our real problems?
I might compare this to throwing cat's around. A rather useless feature,
since anyone knows how to edit and a personal
However, I thought the logo that the agency came up with sucked. :-)
Agree; although it did look good on the mobile browser mockup IMO.
Tom
___
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
That's a property of any filter. But other filters may not fulfil the
requirement for protecting against accidential display of images.
Sir48/Thyge
- Original meddelelse -
Fra: Tobias Oelgarte tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com
Til: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Dato: Tor, 08. sep
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Usually you will find rebranding as part to improve your already
destroyed image. If your image is good, your won't create a new brand
and start from the beginning. Is our image so bad that we would need a
I would be interested to know what the most wanted pages would be if all
links from templates were excluded. If I introduce a redlink into a template
that's transcluded on 2000 pages, it immediately becomes a most wanted
article. I'd also be very interested in seeing this data for other
(as a side-respons: besides being quite rude of making your point this way;
it is nonsensical, because in this case it is the broadcaster (you) who
decides what to leave out, and not the receiver (me). Showing everything or
showing only the parts people want to see have just as much chance for
That is true. But we should represent it as an child protection feature.
It alone can't do the job. But it could help parents with children
playing in the background and users that wan't to read about
controversial content in public. One of the typical, frequently made
requests, if i remember
Oops. I meant, we should _not_ represent it as an child protection
feature.
Am 08.09.2011 17:21, schrieb Tobias Oelgarte:
That is true. But we should represent it as an child protection
feature. It alone can't do the job. But it could help parents with
children playing in the background and
Am 08.09.2011 17:12, schrieb Ilario Valdelli:
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Usually you will find rebranding as part to improve your already
destroyed image. If your image is good, your won't create a new brand
and start from the
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Tobias Oelgarte
tobias.oelga...@googlemail.com wrote:
Does rebranding change anything then the name or appearance?
Or better asked: Does it help to solve any of our real problems?
It might be useful in reducing confusion - when saying that one is on the
board
The brand analysis is very accurate, and I agree with most of it. Except for
the weak brand part: we have a rather unbalanced brand power, where
Wikipedia has a strong, widely recognizable brand, while the sister projects
and the foundation don't.
The end result however is not good. The way it's
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Orionist orion@gmail.com wrote:
The brand analysis is very accurate, and I agree with most of it. Except
for
the weak brand part: we have a rather unbalanced brand power, where
Wikipedia has a strong, widely recognizable brand, while the sister
projects
You can't rebrand what never was properly branded.
Let me say it again:
Wikimedia is a Great Brand, the problem is that it was never promoted properly.
In fact, the brand / logo is hidden at the bottom of the footer in every page!
I'm still waiting for your feedback in my ideas for the
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 05:20:40PM +0200, Lodewijk wrote:
(as a side-respons: besides being quite rude of making your point this way;
Interesting; it's actually a fairly common depiction, eg. :
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JN5JdlnKd7g/Sp-5xSd6pKI/AUI/bXiSz5mhgao/s400/censorship.JPG
On Thu, Sep 08, 2011 at 04:40:13PM +0300, Itzik Edri wrote:
JFI...
I Just finish upload about 15 videos you our channel on youtube. the editor
is working on the rest of them, and we uploading them (again, very heavy
files..). As I said, I hope that until of the month we will finish edit,
The site offers a brilliantly simple user experience, has clear strategic
goals and is driven by the objectives laid out in its Five Pillars. However,
Forget about the Five Pillars. Originally they were three essential
characteristics of the Wikipedia project. They grew to six later. In
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Ziko van Dijk zvand...@googlemail.com wrote:
Hello, you can make Wikimedia as famous as Wikipedia, but it will cost
you many millions of dollars. And why should you?
I doubt that the redesign I propose would be so expensive.
I'm basically asking to put the logo
Predictable result - half the world gains the impression that Wikipedia has
been bought out / sold out.
FT2
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:33 PM, Fajro fai...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Ziko van Dijk zvand...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Hello, you can make Wikimedia as famous as
2011/9/8 Fajro fai...@gmail.com:
Wikimedia is a Great Brand, the problem is that it was never promoted
properly.
In fact, the brand / logo is hidden at the bottom of the footer in
every page!
Hello, you can make Wikimedia as famous as Wikipedia, but it will cost
you many millions of
On 8 September 2011 21:22, Fred Bauder fredb...@fairpoint.net wrote:
2011/9/8 Fajro fai...@gmail.com:
Wikimedia is a Great Brand, the problem is that it was never promoted
properly.
In fact, the brand / logo is hidden at the bottom of the footer in
every page!
Hello, you can make
A more plausible option is to make WMF more conspicuous. Right now it's
almost unknown that WP is part of a wider project.
Wikipedia | Wikiquote | Wikispecies | ...
An educational website of the Wikimedia Foundation
[Button: View all our projects in your language]
FT2
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 6:39 AM, FT2 ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote:
A more plausible option is to make WMF more conspicuous. Right now it's
almost unknown that WP is part of a wider project.
Wikipedia | Wikiquote | Wikispecies | ...
An educational website of the Wikimedia Foundation
That is
Thanks Geoff. One point that I would like some clarification on-
- Harassment, threats, stalking, vandalism, and other long-term issues:
The proposed agreement would make clear that such acts are prohibited.
Novel for us, the agreement also raises the possibility of a global ban
for
The previous terms contained essentially no behavioral prohibitions. I'm not
sure if this was out of concern for Section 230 status, the independence of
projects wrt policy making, or some other reason, but this new set of terms
is a huge departure. It prohibits a broad range of unwanted activity,
Hi,
In the legal department at the Wikimedia Foundation, we have been examining
for some time whether, as the 5th largest website in the world, we need a
new terms of use agreement. Given our size and the need to ensure good
communication with our users, I think we do, so we’ve put ourselves to
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 12:29 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2011 01:24, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:
Hi all,
Just to check: I've been assuming of late that everyone that's interested in
reading announcements (including things like chapter reports,
It's also not difficult to add links to sister projects in the
sidebar, as seen at en.wikibooks since February 2011 [1]. And I know
some other projects do similar things as well, some with JavaScript.
The only difficulty encountered at en.wikibooks is not knowing how to
push the print/export box
Nathan, Theo,
You guys raise good questions (as always). Short answer is that hosting
liability is not compromised, and I think Steven responded to the harassment
policy inquiry.
That said, may I suggest that you put your points on the discussion page as
you see them, and we will answer more
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 00:18, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
- Harassment, threats, stalking, vandalism, and other long-term issues:
The proposed agreement would make clear that such acts are prohibited.
Novel for us, the agreement also raises the possibility of a global ban
for
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 01:48, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 00:18, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
- Harassment, threats, stalking, vandalism, and other long-term issues:
The proposed agreement would make clear that such acts are prohibited.
Novel for
That'll be more than $10 at ~$200/hour. :P
~K
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 8:14 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.comwrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 01:48, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 00:18, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
- Harassment, threats,
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 02:14, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 01:48, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 00:18, Theo10011 de10...@gmail.com wrote:
- Harassment, threats, stalking, vandalism, and other long-term issues:
The
On 8 September 2011 17:28, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
As I am speaking as a steward, I have to say that it's very good news
for us. Instead of being harassed because not dealing with harassment,
since the implementation of ToS that would be WMF's job. That's really
good news for
Sue Gardner wrote:
On 8 September 2011 17:28, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote:
As I am speaking as a steward, I have to say that it's very good news
for us. Instead of being harassed because not dealing with
harassment, since the implementation of ToS that would be WMF's job.
That's
On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 7:01 PM, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
Global bans are already available; but disruptive editors on one Wiki
within
the WM umbrella have gone on to be constructive editors elsewhere. I seem
to
remember Jimbo preaching forgiveness, and I see this proposal,
On 8 September 2011 19:01, Phil Nash phn...@blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
There's a major difference between online harassment, and robust debate,
although most of us can tell where we draw our own lines.
Oh yikes, Phil, please don't misunderstand me! The conversations we
were having were about one
On Wed, Sep 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Dan Rosenthal swatjes...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 5:15 PM, Sarah Stierch sarah.stie...@gmail.comwrote:
Does your feminism excludes necessity for sexual education?
No, but, I can send you some pictures on Commons that have been speedy
55 matches
Mail list logo
