Hi Everyone,
The next Wikimedia Research Showcase will be live-streamed Wednesday, July
11, 2018 at 11:30 AM (PDT) 18:30 UTC.
YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK7AvNKq0sg
As usual, you can join the conversation on IRC at #wikimedia-research. And,
you can watch our past research showcases here.
<https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Showcase#Upcoming_Showcase>
Hope to see you there!
This month's presentations:
Mind the (Language) Gap: Neural Generation of Multilingual Wikipedia
Summaries from Wikidata for ArticlePlaceholdersBy *Lucie-Aimée Kaffee*While
Wikipedia exists in 287 languages, its content is unevenly distributed
among them. It is therefore of the utmost social and cultural interests to
address languages for which native speakers have only access to an
impoverished Wikipedia. In this work, we investigate the generation of
summaries for Wikipedia articles in underserved languages, given structured
data as an input.
In order to address the information bias towards widely spoken languages,
we focus on an important support for such summaries: ArticlePlaceholders,
which are dynamically generated content pages in underserved Wikipedia
versions. They enable native speakers to access existing information in
Wikidata, a structured Knowledge Base (KB). Our system provides a
generative neural network architecture, which processes the triples of the
KB as they are dynamically provided by the ArticlePlaceholder, and generate
a comprehensible textual summary. This data-driven approach is tested with
the goal of understanding how well it matches the communities' needs on two
underserved languages on the Web: Arabic, a language with a big community
with disproportionate access to knowledge online, and Esperanto.
With the help of the Arabic and Esperanto Wikipedians, we conduct an
extended evaluation which exhibits not only the quality of the generated
text but also the applicability of our end-system to any underserved
Wikipedia version. Token-level change tracking: data, tools and
insightsBy *Fabian
Flöck*This talk first gives an overview of the WikiWho infrastructure,
which provides tracking of changes to single tokens (~words) in articles of
different Wikipedia language versions. It exposes APIs for accessing this
data in near-real time, and is complemented by a published static dataset.
Several insights are presented regarding provenance, partial reverts,
token-level conflict and other metrics that only become available with such
data. Lastly, the talk will cover several tools and scripts that are
already using the API and will discuss their application scenarios, such as
investigation of authorship, conflicted content and editor productivity.
Hi, here's a link to a proposal I have for adding visual search to Wikipedia:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Use_visual_search_frontend_for_Wikipedia
via user tomasohara [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tomasohara]
I can move it into a better location if desired as it as not a "sister
project" proper. The Proposals for new projects page
[https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects] doesn't
offer suggestions for alternative postings, so I left it there for
now.
Below is a copy of the project overview. See the link above for
details on how this can be applied to foreign language wikipedias.
Note that most can be supported right "out of the box" except for the
text categorization used to select images for documents without
images. A Wikipedia-specific way to do this might be possible (e.g.,
based on the hierarchy of pages). Otherwise, this is something I
intend to do for the top languages on the web. (Perhaps some grant can
be acquired to do most of the rest, requiring about 40 hours per
language.)
Best,
Tom
---------
It would be good for Wikipedia to use a general-purpose visual search
front end. Note that a big incentive for this is that users will be
drawn to Wikipedia to use this type of search rather than Google
Search or Bing. This would be good because these search engines often
show Wikipedia content for popular entities like sports stars or
tourist attractions, which cuts down on Wikipedia traffic.
You will be able to use the visual search frontend I developed without
charge for the duration of my patent in the works (a la license free).
Here is a simple example with Wikipedia search on left and my Scrappy
Search on right (i.e., white vs. tan backgrounds):
http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-small-dog-breeds-en-…
Two other examples illustrate some added benefits of this visual
search with respect to Wikipedia. First, disambiguation becomes based
on images and keywords rather than just snippets of text. See the
following:
http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-bob-jones-en-wiki-si…
In addition, links to other pages for the same entity become much more engaging:
http://www.scrappycito.com/wikipedia-vs-scrappy-search-taylor-swift-en-wiki…
See http://www.scrappycito.com for the stable version of the system
and http://www.tomasohara.trade:9330 for the work-in-progress version.
The latter has support for handheld devices and also better aesthetics
(n.b., version used in examples).
I think this will be extremely popular with the Instagram crowd and
younger users in general (e.g., younger than 30). To do similar
Wikipedia-specific searches with the visual search front end, just add
site:en.wikipedia.org to the query, as in following example:
Lionel Messi site:en.wikipedia.org
Scrappy Search uses the Google search API, so all of the search
operators are supported. See
https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/2466433?hl=en
The patent for this visual search will be owned by my company
ScrappyCito, LLC. If the company gets acquired, I will require that
they honor the license-free usage of the visual search system by
Wikimedia for Wikipedia. (They will likewise be required to pass along
this license-free usage requirement if they in turn are acquired,
etc.). You will have access to the current source code for use in
Wikipedia and other approved projects.
I am doing this both for exposure and because I want to help keep
Wikipedia viable (e.g., by enabling higher traffic). This is a great
way for users to browse the encyclopedia, so it can keep users on the
Wikipedia domain longer.
If this sounds interesting, I can develop a prototype for the Simple
English Wikipedia for use on one of my servers. After review, I can
help with the deployment for the regular English Wikipedia on your
servers once approved.
==============================================================
Tom O'Hara, founder ScrappyCito, LLC.
PO Box 6430
tomasohara(a)gmail.com
Austin, TX 78762-6430
737-203-1577
www.scrappycito.com
Hi Andra,
I agree this is misconception that a copyright license make any direct
change to data reliability. But attribution requirement does somewhat
indirectly have an impact on it, as it legally enforce traceability.
That is I strongly disagree with the following assertion: "a license
that requires BY sucks so hard for data [because] attribution
requirements grow very quickly". To my mind it is equivalent to say that
we will throw away traceability because it is subjectively judged too
large a burden, without providing any start of evidence that it indeed
can't be managed, at least with Wikimedia current ressources.
Now, I don't say traceability is the sole factor one should take into
account in data reliability, but certainly it is one of them. Maybe we
should first come with clear criteria to put in a equation that enable
to calculate reliability of information. Since it's in the core goals of
the Wikimedia strategy, it would certainly worth the effort to establish
clear metrics about reliability of information the movement is spreading.
Cheers
Le 04/07/2018 à 13:00, Andra Waagmeester a écrit :
> I agree with Maarten and to add to that. It is a huge misconception
> that CC0 makes data unreliable. It is only a legal statement about
> copyright, nothing more, nothing less. Statements without proper
> references and qualifiers make data unreliable, but Wikidata has a
> decent mechanism to capture that needed provenance.
>
> On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 12:50 PM, Maarten Dammers <maarten(a)mdammers.nl
> <mailto:maarten@mdammers.nl>> wrote:
>
> Hi Mathieu,
>
> On 04-07-18 11:07, mathieu stumpf guntz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Le 19/05/2018 à 03:35, Denny Vrandečić a écrit :
>
>
> Regarding attribution, commonly it is assumed that you
> have to respect it transitively. That is one of the
> reasons a license that requires BY sucks so hard for data:
> unlike with text, the attribution requirements grow very
> quickly. It is the same as with modified images and
> collages: it is not sufficient to attribute the last
> author, but all contributors have to be attributed.
>
> If we want our data to be trustable, then we need
> traceability. That is reporting this chain of sources as
> extensively as possible, whatever the license require or not
> as attribution. CC-0 allow to break this traceability, which
> make an aweful license to whoever is concerned with obtaining
> reliable data.
>
> A license is not the way to achieve this. We have references for that.
>
>
> This is why I think that whoever wants to be part of a
> large federation of data on the web, should publish under CC0.
>
> As long as one aim at making a federation of untrustable data
> banks, that's perfect. ;)
>
> So I see you started forum shopping (trying to get the Wikimedia-l
> people in) and making contentious trying to be funny remarks.
> That's usually a good indication a thread is going nowhere.
>
> No, Wikidata is not going to change the CC0. You seem to be the
> only person wanting that and trying to discredit Wikidata will not
> help you in your crusade. I suggest the people who are still
> interested in this to go to
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728
> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728> and make useful
> comments over there.
>
> Maarten
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org>
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Thank you for your answer, Sebastian.
Publishing the Gutachten would be fantastic! That would be very helpful and
deeply appreciated.
Regarding the relicensing, I agree with you. You can just go and do that,
and given that you ask for attribution to DBpedia, and not to Wikipedia, I
would claim that's what you're doing. And I think that's fine.
Regarding attribution, commonly it is assumed that you have to respect it
transitively. That is one of the reasons a license that requires BY sucks
so hard for data: unlike with text, the attribution requirements grow very
quickly. It is the same as with modified images and collages: it is not
sufficient to attribute the last author, but all contributors have to be
attributed.
This is why I think that whoever wants to be part of a large federation of
data on the web, should publish under CC0.
That is very different from licensing texts or images. But for data
anything else is just weird and will bite is in the long run more than we
might ever benefit.
So, just to say it again: if the Gutachten you mentioned could be made
available, that would be very very awesome!
Thank you, Denny
On Thu, May 17, 2018, 23:06 Sebastian Hellmann <
hellmann(a)informatik.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
> Hi Denny,
>
> On 18.05.2018 02:54, Denny Vrandečić wrote:
>
> Rob Speer wrote:
> > The result of this, by the way, is that commercial entities sell modified
> > versions of Wikidata with impunity. It undermines the terms of other
> > resources such as DBPedia, which also contains facts extracted from
> > Wikipedia and respects its Share-Alike terms. Why would anyone use
> DBPedia
> > and have to agree to share alike, when they can get similar data from
> > Wikidata which promises them it's CC-0?
>
> The comparison to DBpedia is interesting: the terms for DBpedia state
> "Attribution in this case means keep DBpedia URIs visible and active
> through at least one (preferably all) of @href, <link />, or "Link:". If
> live links are impossible (e.g., when printed on paper), a textual
> blurb-based attribution is acceptable."
> http://wiki.dbpedia.org/terms-imprint
>
> So according to these terms, when someone displays data from DBpedia, it
> is entirely sufficient to attribute DBpedia.
>
> What that means is that DBpedia follows exactly the same theory as
> Wikidata: it is OK to extract data from Wikipedia and republish it as your
> own dataset under your own copyright without requiring attribution to the
> original source of the extraction.
>
> (A bit more problematic might be the fact that DBpedia also republishes
> whole paragraphs of Text under these terms, but that's another story)
>
>
> My understanding is that all that Wikidata has extracted from Wikipedia is
> non-copyrightable in the first place and thus republishing it under a
> different license (or, as in the case of DBpedia for simple triples, with a
> different attribution) is legally sound.
>
>
> In the SmartDataWeb project https://www.smartdataweb.de/ we hired lawyers
> to write a legal review about the extraction situation. Facts can be
> extracted and republished under CC-0 without problem as is the case of
> infoboxes.. Copying a whole database is a different because database rights
> hold. If you only extract ~ two sentences it falls under citation, which is
> also easy. If it is more than two sentence, then copyright applies.
>
> I can check whether it is ready and shareable. The legal review
> (Gutachten) is quite a big thing as it has some legal relevancy and can be
> cited in court.
>
> Hence we can switch to ODC-BY with facts as CC-0 and the text as
> share-alike. However the attribution mentioned in the imprint is still
> fine, since it is under database and not the content/facts.
> I am still uncertain about the attribution. If you remix and publish you
> need to cite the direct sources. But if somebody takes from you, does he
> only attribute to you or to everybody you used in a transitive way.
>
> Anyhow, we are sharpening the whole model towards technology, not
> data/content. So the databus will be a transparent layer and it is much
> easier to find the source like Wikipedia and Wikidata and do contributions
> there, which is actually one of the intentions of share-alike (getting work
> pushed back/upstream).
>
> All the best,
> Sebastian
>
>
> If there is disagreement with that, I would be interested which content
> exactly is considered to be under copyright and where license has not been
> followed on Wikidata.
>
> For completion: the discussion is going on in parallel on the Wikidata
> project chat and in Phabricator:
>
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728#4212728
>
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat#Wikipedia_and_other_Wik…
>
>
> I would appreciate if we could keep the discussion in a single place.
>
> Gnom1 on Phabricator has offered to actually answer legal questions, but
> we need to come up with the questions that we want to ask. If it should be,
> for example, as Rob Speer states on the bug, "has the copyright of
> interwiki links been breached by having them be moved to Wikidata?", I'd be
> quite happy with that question - if that's the disagreement, let us ask
> Legal help and see if my understanding or yours is correct.
>
> Does this sound like a reasonable question? Or which other question would
> you like to ask instead?
>
>
> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 4:15 PM Rob Speer <rob(a)luminoso.com> wrote:
>
>> > As always, copyright is predatory. As we can prove that copyright is the
>> enemy of science and knowledge
>>
>> Well, this kind of gets to the heart of the issue, doesn't it.
>>
>> I support the Creative Commons license, including the share-alike term,
>> which requires copyright in order to work, and I've contributed to
>> multiple
>> Wikimedia projects with the understanding that my work would be protected
>> by CC-By-SA.
>>
>> Wikidata is engaged in a project-wide act of disobedience against
>> CC-By-SA.
>> I would say that GerardM has provided an excellent summary of the attitude
>> toward Creative Commons that I've encountered on Wikidata: "it's holding
>> us
>> back", "it's the enemy", "you can't copyright knowledge", "you can't make
>> us follow it", etc.
>>
>> The result of this, by the way, is that commercial entities sell modified
>> versions of Wikidata with impunity. It undermines the terms of other
>> resources such as DBPedia, which also contains facts extracted from
>> Wikipedia and respects its Share-Alike terms. Why would anyone use DBPedia
>> and have to agree to share alike, when they can get similar data from
>> Wikidata which promises them it's CC-0?
>>
>> On Wed, 16 May 2018 at 21:43 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hoi,
>> > Thank you for the overly broad misrepresentation. As always, copyright
>> is
>> > predatory. As we can prove that copyright is the enemy of science and
>> > knowledge we should not be upset that *copyright *is abused we should
>> > welcome it as it proves the point. Also when we use texts from
>> everywhere
>> > and rephrase it in Wikipedia articles "we" are not lily white either.
>> >
>> > In "them old days" generally we felt that when people would use
>> Wikipedia,
>> > it would only serve our purpose; share the sum of all knowledge. I still
>> > feel really good about that. And, it has been shown that what we do;
>> > maintain / curate / update that data that it is not easily given to do
>> as
>> > well as "we" do it.
>> >
>> > When we are to be more precise with our copyright, there are a few
>> things
>> > we could do to make copyright more transparent. When data is to be
>> uploaded
>> > (Commons / Wikipedia or Wikidata) we should use a user that is OWNED and
>> > operated by the copyright holder. The operation may be by proxy and as a
>> > consequence there is no longer a question about copyright as the
>> copyright
>> > holder can do as we wants. This makes any future noises just that,
>> > annoying.
>> >
>> > As to copyright on Wikidata, when you consider copyright using data from
>> > Wikipedia. The question is: "What Wikipedia" I have copied a lot of data
>> > from several Wikipedias and believe me, from a quality point of view
>> there
>> > is much to be gained by using Wikidata as an instrument for good
>> because it
>> > is really strong in identifying friends and false friends. It is
>> superior
>> > as a tool for disambiguation.
>> >
>> > About the copyright on data, the overriding question with data is: do
>> you
>> > copy data wholesale in Wikidata. That is what a database copyright is
>> > about. As I wrote on my blog [1], the best data to include is data that
>> is
>> > corroborated by the fact that it is present in multiple sources. This
>> > negates the notion of a single source, it also underscores that much of
>> the
>> > data everywhere is replicated a lot. It also underscores, again, the
>> notion
>> > that data that is only present in single sources is what needs
>> attention.
>> > It needs tender loving care, it needs other sources to establish
>> > credentials. That is in its own right what makes any claim of copyright
>> > moot. It is in this process that it becomes a "creative" process
>> negating
>> > the copyright held on databases.
>> >
>> > I welcome the attention that is given to copyright in Wikidata. However
>> our
>> > attention to copyright is predatory in two ways. It is how can we get
>> > around existing copyright and how can we protect our own. As argued,
>> > Wikidata shines when it is used for what it is intended to be; the place
>> > that brings data, of Wikipedias first and elsewhere second, together to
>> be
>> > used as a repository of quality, open and linked data.
>> > Thanks,
>> > GerardM
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> >
>> https://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2018/05/wikidata-copyright-and-linked-d…
>> >
>> > On 11 May 2018 at 23:10, Rob Speer <rob(a)luminoso.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Wow, thanks for the heads up. When I was getting upset about projects
>> > that
>> > > change the license on Wikimedia content and commercialize it, I had no
>> > idea
>> > > that Wikidata was providing them the cover to do so. The Creative
>> Commons
>> > > violation is coming from inside the house!
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, 8 May 2018 at 03:48 mathieu stumpf guntz <
>> > > psychoslave(a)culture-libre.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hello everybody,
>> > > >
>> > > > There is a phabricator ticket on Solve legal uncertainty of Wikidata
>> > > > <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193728> that you might be
>> > interested
>> > > > to look at and participate in.
>> > > >
>> > > > As Denny suggested in the ticket to give it more visibility through
>> the
>> > > > discussion on the Wikidata chat
>> > > > <
>> > > > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat#
>> > > Importing_datasets_under_incompatible_licenses>,
>> > > >
>> > > > I thought it was interesting to highlight it a bit more.
>> > > >
>> > > > Cheers
>> > > >
>> > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > > Unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
>> ?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > > _______________________________________________
>> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
>> ,
>> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing listWikidata@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
> --
> All the best,
> Sebastian Hellmann
>
> Director of Knowledge Integration and Linked Data Technologies (KILT)
> Competence Center
> at the Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) at Leipzig University
> Executive Director of the DBpedia Association
> Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://nlp2rdf.org,
> http://linguistics.okfn.org, https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt
> <http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt>
> Homepage: http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann
> Research Group: http://aksw.org
>
Hey folks,
I'm happy to announce the launch of the Inspire Campaign on Measuring
Community Health.[1] The goal of this campaign is to gather your ideas on
approaches to measure or evaluate the experience and quality of
participating and interacting with others in Wikimedia projects.
So what is community health? Healthy projects promote high quality content
creation, respectful collaboration, efficient workflows, and effective
conflict resolution. Tasks and experiences that result in patterns of
editor frustration, poor editor retention, harassment, broken workflows,
and unresolved conflicts are unhealthy for a project.
As a movement, Wikimedians have always measured aspects of their
communities. Data points, such as editor activity levels, are regularly
collected. While these metrics provide some useful indications about the
health of a project, they do not give major insights into challenges and
specific areas needing improvement or what areas have been successful.
We want to hear from you what specific areas on your Wikimedia project
should be evaluated or measured, and how it should be done. Share your
ideas, contribute to other people’s submissions, and get involved in the
new Inspire Campaign. After the campaign, grants and other paths are
available to support the formal development of these measures and
evaluation techniques.[2]
With thanks,
Chris Schilling
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Grants:IdeaLab/Inspire
[2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Develop
Chris "Jethro" Schilling
I JethroBT (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:I_JethroBT_(WMF)>
Program Officer, Wikimedia Foundation
<https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home>
Hi all,
It is my pleasure to inform you that this year in the Republic of Srpska
will be organized a photo competition Trace of Soul 2018
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Trace_of_Soul_2018> (WLE+WLM). The
project will be implemented in the organization Wikimedia Community of the
Republic of Srpska for the period from 1 August to 27 October of the
current year. If you are interested in participating and assisting in the
organization, promotion or within another segment - we will be glad to
cooperate. Contact us.
Best,
Bojana Podgorica
*Замислите свет у коме свака особа на планети има слободан приступ
целокупном људском знању. То је оно на чему ми радимо.*
*This letter is also available on Meta-Wiki here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/?curid=10631068>*
*Please consider supporting with translations. *
Dear friends,
On Tuesday, the highest court in the United States, the Supreme Court,
ruled in favor of the current U.S. administration’s restrictions[1] on
travel and immigration from seven countries.[2] In a 5-4 ruling, the Court
found that the restrictions were lawfully created, despite their breach of
the longstanding ideals of the U.S. immigration system and disturbing
comments [3] made by the current administration about the religious basis
for some of these restrictions.
Of the seven countries named, at least three have active Wikimedia
communities. The Wikimedia chapter in Venezuela, Iranian Wikimedians user
group, and proposed Libyan user group represent the reality that our
movement has no borders. Our mission does not discriminate, it unites: in
these and other countries, we have friends, allies, and fellow Wikimedians.
To our fellow Wikimedians, particularly those from or with family in
affected countries: we stand with you and reject the premise of this
outcome. Our movement is possible because of the belief that everyone,
everywhere, should be able to contribute to shared human understanding. We
believe in a world where every country, language, and culture can freely
collaborate without restriction in our shared effort of making free
knowledge accessible to every person. Wikipedia is proof of what can happen
when these freedoms are unrestricted. When our ability to come together is
limited, the world is a poorer place.
The Wikimedia Foundation has opposed the restrictions since earlier
versions were first introduced. We responded to an executive order in early
2017[4] by joining many other organizations and companies in signing a
series of amicus briefs before the courts hearing these cases.[5] We have
posted an update on the Wikimedia blog detailing our position on the most
recent outcome of this case. [6]
We are mindful that these restrictions may have real impacts on individual
staff and community members, as well as our families and communities. The
Wikimedia Foundation rejects the spirit of this ban and similar
restrictions in place around the world that treat some more equally than
others. Our commitment to our global ethos and shared vision will continue
to guide our policy efforts into the future, as we strive to uphold the
values that make our movement possible.
Katherine
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13780
[2]
https://www.apnews.com/3a20abe305bd4c989116f82bf535393b/High-court-OKs-Trump's-travel-ban,-rejects-Muslim-bias-claim
[3]
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/12/donald-trump-calls-halt-muslims-ente…
[4] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/01/30/knowledge-knows-no-boundaries/
[5] See
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/02/06/amicus-brief-immigration-travel-restr…,
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/03/15/amicus-brief-us-travel-restrictions/,
and
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/09/18/amicus-brief-us-travel-immigration/
[6]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2018/07/02/supreme-court-immigration-wikimedia-v…
--
Katherine Maher
Executive Director
Wikimedia Foundation
1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
San Francisco, CA 94104
+1 (415) 839-6885 ext. 6635
+1 (415) 712 4873
kmaher(a)wikimedia.org
https://annual.wikimedia.org
Hi folks,
La grande nouvelle du jour / the big news today : the French Wikipedia
reached two millions articles a few hours ago !
The fr.wp community has written a press release for this milestone with
subpages for more explanations and get new people to edit WP.
and, off course, a commemorative logo community will be displayed.
Merci à tous les contributeurs / Thanks for all the editors.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spécial:Statistiqueshttps://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipédia:Deux_millions_d'articles_en_français
--
Thierry
