Hi,
Philipe (WMF head of reader relations) recently reverted a :en
geonotice added by Deryck Chan. This appears to run counter to the
previous position held by the WMF that they leave the decisions to the
Wikipedia community and would not interfere (presumably unless there
was a legal issue).
Hi,
I was surprised when Fæ named me as the person who got reverted. Turns out
it isn't me. The whole sequence of events should be summarised thus:
1. Pharos added the original WLL (Wikipedia Loves Libraries) notice on 15
August
If I'm reading Philippe's edit summary right, he seems to be reverting because
WLL is apparently covered by a centralnotice, and so it doesn't need a
geonotice as well. If that's the case, then WMF or not, it's just housekeeping.
Harry
From: Deryck Chan
On 7 October 2011 13:02, Fae fae...@gmail.com wrote:
I am unclear about the WLL central notice. Is there a discussion
somewhere that explains why this notice about a regional GLAM activity
would be a central notice rather than a USA specific Wikipedia
geonotice?
The centralnotice was
I don't see how there can possibly be a problem with a Foundation staff
member removing geonotices on the grounds that they are duplicated by
CentralNotice.
I also think CentralNotice is being over-used a bit. While there are
circumstances where I could see the chapter making use of it (so long
Personally, I couldn't care less which of the various notices I see, but I
wouldn't want to see two notices about the same thing.
I guess the CentralNotice has the advantage of being cross-project; we could
always request a cross-project geonotice, but I'm sure the devs have more
important
I think the original point is being diluted by repeated 'meh' opinions.
The issue here is that the WMF claimed no responsibility for the
lobbying notice raised on it.wiki and when I asked for clarification
were clear that they left these notices for the community. This
contradicts the actions of
