Thanks Deryk, there seems to be some deep feelings on this one. There seems
to some suspicion that there is a conspiracy to raise the profile of women
on Wikipedia. well they are right! However that doesn't mean to say
that we want to ignore the rules.
I recently wrote an article about a
On 09/12/16 11:10, Andrew West wrote:
> the lists are notable
> and of public interest because they have been featured in TV
> programmes,
And radio too!
:-)
Gordo
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediau...@wikimedia.org
Thanks Lucy
On 5 December 2016 at 14:41, Lucy Crompton-Reid <
lucy.crompton-r...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
> Dear all
>
> As I know some of you will already be aware, Wikimedia UK, Women in Red
> and Wikimedia editors and communities around the world are partnering with
> BBC 100 Women to raise
Fortunately nobody is suggesting deletion :-) However there is a good
learning point for future projects, in that on any start of a project
the question of copyright needs to be taken on, to ensure all possible
tees are crossed and ies dotted so that volunteers can avoid getting
bogged down in
On 9 December 2016 at 10:49, Richard Nevell
wrote:
> That's interesting. How was the issue handled with A History of the World in
> 100 Objects a few years back?
I don't think that the issue was ever mentioned by anyone. In cases
like [[A History of the World in
That's interesting. How was the issue handled with *A History of the World
in 100 Objects* a few years back?
On 9 December 2016 at 10:13, Fæ wrote:
> See [1], in short if a list can be created by repeatable analysis of
> data, then it's not copyrightable, otherwise, by
Thanks Fae, this is super helpful! By 'legal clarity' I meant 'will talk to
people in the community who know more about this than I do', rather than
'see a lawyer' :)
Will follow up early next week.
Cheers
Lucy
On 9 December 2016 at 10:13, Fæ wrote:
> See [1], in short if a
See [1], in short if a list can be created by repeatable analysis of
data, then it's not copyrightable, otherwise, by definition, it must
have subjective creativity and so is copyrightable. The 100 women list
is not independently repeatable, so to be published on Wikipedia
without future risk of
Hi all
There does seem to be some disagreement as to whether copyright is actually
an issue in the case of the list of 100 women. I will be doing quite a lot
of follow up with the BBC over the next few weeks so am happy to add this
to my list of things to discuss, however I will try to seek legal
On 08/12/16 17:32, Michael Peel wrote:
> An interesting question that could do with a speedy response (and maybe
> a copyright release email from the BBC to OTRS) has been posted at:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:100_Women_(BBC)#Is_it_not_a_copyright_violation_to_publish_this_list.3F
>
milar in lots of ways...
>
>
> Sara
>
>
> --
> *From:* Wikimediauk-l <wikimediauk-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org> on
> behalf of Roger Bamkin <victuall...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* 08 December 2016 19:36
> *To:* wikimediauk-l
> *Subject:*
Bamkin <victuall...@gmail.com>
Sent: 08 December 2016 19:36
To: wikimediauk-l
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] BBC 100 Women and Wikimedia
The editors in London who had editor support did very well. We trained lots of
very bright people. I know that we've had dozens in other languages and we had
newbi
The editors in London who had editor support did very well. We trained lots
of very bright people. I know that we've had dozens in other languages and
we had newbies in London creating two good articles. A link to the detail
might have been a catch all but we no have a bare Edit button above every
An interesting question that could do with a speedy response (and maybe a
copyright release email from the BBC to OTRS) has been posted at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:100_Women_(BBC)#Is_it_not_a_copyright_violation_to_publish_this_list.3F
Thanks,
Mike
> On 8 Dec 2016, at 11:37, Lucy
On 08/12/16 13:37, Lucy Crompton-Reid wrote:
>
> At the training events we are of course reinforcing the need for
> appropriate secondary sources, and lots of preparation work has been
> done by Roger and other Women in Red editors, Stuart Prior at Wikimedia
> UK and BBC staff to create lists of
On 08/12/16 12:56, WereSpielChequers wrote:
>
> I'm wondering whether it might be worth doing an article rescue
> editathon as part of the next feminism event -
Or any other themed event?
Gordo
___
Wikimedia UK mailing list
Thanks Jonathan, that's a great idea!
At the training events we are of course reinforcing the need for
appropriate secondary sources, and lots of preparation work has been done
by Roger and other Women in Red editors, Stuart Prior at Wikimedia UK and
BBC staff to create lists of women to be added
Since the BBC is encouraging people to create unsourced articles on living
people there is a high possibility they will turn up at either
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:BLP_articles_proposed_for_deletion
or even
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Candidates_for_speedy_deletion
I've
On 08/12/16 12:01, Sara Thomas wrote:
>
> As is my custom, I'll be placing the {{new user article}} template on
> the talk pages of any articles created by new users today.
Which then expands to
**
This is an article recently created by a new user.
Fantastic, thanks Sara!
Lucy
On 8 December 2016 at 12:01, Sara Thomas wrote:
> Hello all!
>
> On my way from a wiki session in Edinburgh to the BBC session in Glasgow,
> where m'colleague Ewan is already guiding that team. I provided a training
> session a week or so ago in
Dear all
As I know some of you will already be aware, Wikimedia UK, Women in Red and
Wikimedia editors and communities around the world are partnering with BBC
100 Women to raise awareness of the gender gap on Wikipedia, improve
coverage of women and encourage women to edit.
A multi-location,
21 matches
Mail list logo