Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikitribune!

On 04/25/2017 05:59 PM, Jimmy Wales wrote: Today I announced a new initiative, outside of my Wikimedia activities, to combat fake news. It is important to me that I share directly with all of you information about this new initiative early on. First I should say (putting aside the name,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Draft Code of Conduct for Technical Spaces

On 02/26/2017 01:23 PM, Adrian Raddatz wrote: The benefit to individual admins (and whatever the equivalent is on phab) making decisions about blocks is that you know who did it and how to appeal it. There is no equivalent on Phabricator. That just had enforcement by Developer Relations,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Draft Code of Conduct for Technical Spaces

On 02/25/2017 02:15 PM, MZMcBride wrote: The "no conduct policy for technical spaces" argument was debunked here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2016-November/085573.html This is false. None of the three policies you cited are a code of conduct for technical spaces that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Draft Code of Conduct for Technical Spaces

On 02/21/2017 06:24 PM, Todd Allen wrote: No. The community I am referring to is all WMF project participants who might be interested in presenting their opinion on the subject, regardless of whether or not they currently participate in any given specific area. That is always the case. No, it

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Draft Code of Conduct for Technical Spaces

On 02/21/2017 05:42 PM, Erik Bernhardson wrote: It's not particularly clear hear, which community? The developers of mediawiki-core? extension developers? people who attend hackathons and such? It seems all of these groups have been bombarded with calls to participate in the process over the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Draft Code of Conduct for Technical Spaces

On 02/21/2017 05:36 PM, Lane Rasberry wrote: I would like for whatever is adopted to match other similar proposals. So far as I know, the technical space proposal is not compared with the "online" proposal or the "events" proposal. Although those are training modules and the Code of Conduct

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

On 11/17/2016 04:57 PM, C. Scott Ananian wrote: I would love to have a broader discussion about communication in the projects more generally. As you know, we currently have a few mechanisms (and please correct any mischaracterizations in the below): As people may know, we are working on a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Why we changed

On 02/21/2016 11:03 PM, Andreas Kolbe wrote: So, if you speak of structurally connecting *open* sources, as a basis for smart editing tools, you seem to be saying that such copyrighted yet openly accessible sources, as well as all genuinely paywalled sources, should be excluded from these

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Changes in the Board

On 01/27/2016 03:52 PM, Patricio Lorente wrote: Dear All, Throughout the discussion about the appointment of Arnnon Geshuri to the Board of Trustees, the Board has carefully listened to you and discussed internally. Earlier today, Arnnon decided to step down from the Board. Thank you to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google

On 01/20/2016 09:36 PM, George Herbert wrote: There was a finding of civil, not criminal, liability in the case. Against the companies as a whole not individuals. Generally such never becomes individual liability or criminality. You're right that we shouldn't expect criminal charges of

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF trustee Arnnon Geshuri and part in anticompetitive agreements in Google

On 01/08/2016 12:43 PM, Dariusz Jemielniak wrote: On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Pine W wrote: Dariusz, you said in your statement that was published in the Wikimedia Blog that WMF "considered dozens of candidates from all over the world, with not-for-profit and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On 12/31/2015 08:02 AM, Patricio Lorente wrote: Thank you to everyone who responded to my email about the Board’s recent decision. We recognize this is the Board's first removal of a sitting Trustee, and that has led to questions and perhaps some confusion. I wanted to provide you with some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On 12/31/2015 04:07 AM, Anthony Cole wrote: Matt, here , Jimmy says this was a removal for cause. Thanks, I appreciate you forwarding this. Matt Flaschen ___

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

On 12/29/2015 07:19 AM, Gnangarra wrote: there are bigger questions than why like; - how can this take place - how can the community ensure its representatives independence in the future, - what effect will this have on other elected representatives on the board The

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Under Florida law (https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808), there is a distinction between removals for cause and removals not for cause (https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808). Removals not for cause require a 2/3 majority (this standard was still met). If you are

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

Yes, it's still a Florida organization. You can see the resolution cites https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Bylaws#Section_7._Removal , which in turn cites Section 617.0808(1), which is what I linked to ( https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808) Matt Flaschen On Monday, December

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Announcing Danny Horn's move to Community Tech

On 10/01/2015 07:05 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: Howdy (my apologies for cross-posting), I'm pleased to announce that the Community Tech team has a new Product Manager – Danny Horn, who will be moving from the Collaboration team to join this new initiative. The Community Tech team is focused on

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's fix templates

On 09/02/2014 03:27 PM, pi zero wrote: The templates are extremely complicated in implementation, which is irrelevant. If templates were rejected based on extremely complicated implementation, that would rule out essentially everything that uses Scribuntu under the hood. I don't agree with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's fix templates

On 09/03/2014 07:08 AM, John Mark Vandenberg wrote: (Wouldn't it be nice if all skins could be written in Lua + LESS stored as wikipages on the wiki, instead of distributed as php files; I know of one LESS skin which works well: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Skin:Chameleon ; are there others?)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Let's fix templates

I agree with the general thrust of Brad's points. There are some known major issues with templating (styling, unreadable parser functions, and templates being used for data like Information on Commons are the most important ones). However, these do not all have the same solutions. Some

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanking anonymous users

On 01/13/2014 01:25 AM, MZMcBride wrote: I don't follow what you're saying about a bot account being the only alternative. You can use the exact same user interface exposure (i.e., little (thanks) links) and simply post to the IP's talk page rather than creating an Echo (logged-in user)

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Commons-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

On 12/16/2013 03:36 AM, Andrew Gray wrote: Remember that while US caselaw is clear on this point, it is less clear-cut elsewhere. We at WM tend to take a clear line that 2D reproductions are ineligible, but it's not a guaranteed absolute truth, particularly in the UK! We can predict how a court

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The British Library releases 1 million images

On 12/15/2013 12:48 PM, Juergen Fenn wrote: 2013/12/15 Katie Chan k...@ktchan.info: We plan to launch a crowdsourcing application at the beginning of next year, to help describe what the images portray. The images release contained no image-level metadata == One million uncategorised images

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Which Wikipedias have had large scale bot creation of articles this year?

On 11/25/2013 05:00 PM, Erik Zachte wrote: For all time totals per bot there is http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/BotActivityMatrixCreates.htm For the purposes of that chart, how are you defining bots? Thanks, Matt Flaschen ___ Wikimedia-l mailing

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Increase in page views for the last 3 months

It's not clear if this is a bug or true organic growth, but it seems to be occurring across multiple Wikipedias (see the rest of the thread). Matt Flaschen Original Message Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Increase in page views for the last 3 months Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 23:41:09

Re: [Wikimedia-l] September 11 wiki

On 11/20/2013 07:09 PM, Tim Starling wrote: In 2007, the September 11 wiki was moved to a non-Wikimedia site, evidently hosted by an individual without the capacity to preserve that content for posterity. It was offline after only 3 years. It is still accessible at the Internet Archive's

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright infringement - The real elephant in the room

On 11/13/2013 04:57 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: Marco Chiesa, 13/11/2013 10:21: There are bots that go and look whether a newly inserted block of text is already present somewhere else, [...] Rectius: there *used* to be a bot (RevertBot, Lusumbot). The program

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright infringement - The real elephant in the room

On 11/16/2013 09:04 AM, Anthony Cole wrote: The problem of false positives from mirrors doesn't exist if we scan edits as they are made. Agreed. However, that example is a legal, attributed (at least on the talk page) copy from a third-party freely licensed text, not a false positive copy

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright infringement - The real elephant in the room

On 11/13/2013 02:40 AM, James Heilman wrote: The Wikimedia Foundation needs to wake up and deal with the real tech elephant in the room. Our primary issue is not a lack of FLOW, a lack of a visual editor, or a lack of a rapidly expanding education program. Our biggest issue is copyright

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright infringement - The real elephant in the room

On 11/13/2013 05:16 AM, Philippe Beaudette wrote: On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 2:37 AM, Matthew Flaschen matthew.flasc...@gatech.edu wrote: A significant problem with TurnItIn is that is proprietary, and can not be customized by anyone in the movement. The fact that it is proprietary also means

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Invalid security certificate for en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org

On 10/02/2013 08:49 PM, Tim Starling wrote: On 02/10/13 05:56, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: Yes, beta can't currently really be used unless you manually confirm certificates. (Which, by the way, you should never do on any website.) Why not? Self-signed certificates are as secure as plain HTTP,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia and the politics of encryption

On 09/02/2013 06:17 PM, Tim Starling wrote: It would allow WMF to monitor censorship and surveillance by being in the request loop. There's no guarantee they would accept HTTPS, even if there were still user surveillance inside the data center. It would be kind of like the cooperation we

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Disinformation regarding perfect forward secrecy for HTTPS

On 08/02/2013 05:06 PM, James Salsman wrote: Marc, I note that you have recommending not keeping the Perl CPAN modules up to date on Wikimedia Labs: http://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Wikimedia_Labs/Tool_Labs/Needed_Toolserver_featuresdiff=678902oldid=678746 saying that out of date

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Staff Images

On 07/12/2013 04:18 AM, Eddy Paine wrote: Dan, A placeholder for people without pictures shouldn't be a problem. Thats common use. And they are all the same so thats a OK thing. The picture of Rory is a picture of Rory. It even says its a mascot and I agree with Erik we need Tux for

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Zero in Google search result

On 06/18/2013 06:35 PM, Adam Baso wrote: Update: We've added an enhancement to Wikipedia Zero so that if a user who isn't on a participating carrier network navigates to a Wikipedia Zero page on language.zero.wikipedia.org, such as http://en.zero.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muse_%28band%29 , the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: First public peek at Daala, next-next-generation video codec from Xiph

On 06/20/2013 07:09 PM, Samuel Klein wrote: And what should pop up in my mailbox but a discussion about the next free video codec the Xiph Foundation is working on. This looks pretty amazing, and is worth a read: http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/daala/demo1.shtml Thanks for pointing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] prism and certificate authorities, snooping https

On 06/15/2013 05:48 PM, rupert THURNER wrote: the conclusion is also interesting: when a company that uses a certificate authority located in a country different than the one in which it holds user data, it needlessly exposes users’ data to the compelled disclosure by an additional