@Tobias O.:
You are wrong, the day before yesterday
RalfR. wrote,
that only the winners will write history
(Aber es stimmt schon,
der Sieger schreibt die Geschichte, so
falsch das auch sein mag
<http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Diskussion:Deutsche_Demokratische_Republik&diff=prev&oldid=104857671>),
a sentence which was (and is) used in
germany against the
international Nuremberg Trials
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Trials>
after WWII, (the court-trial against
the Hitlers gang) till today. In RalfRs
opinion, the former goverment
of east germany was not a dictatorship.
If you would take this sentence as
true, no enzyklopaedian would have
written their books.
It looks like as if RalfR. wants to be a
winner...
The posting I wrote to the german
chapter mailinglist, was object to
anonymous censorchip by the german
mailinglist administration,
nevertheless I would never use a word
like bullshit :) :
On Tue, Jun 28, 2012 at 14:32 PM (CET), Paul<paul.m.nz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Ihre Anfrage an die Mailingliste WikiDE-l
Veröffentlichung Ihrer Nachricht betreffend "Re: WikiDE-l
Nachrichtensammlung, Band 107, Eintrag 10"
wurde vom Listenmoderator mit folgender Begruendung abgewiesen:
"Ihre Nachricht wurde vom Moderator als unangebracht erachtet. Keine
PAs auf der ML."
Fragen oder Kommentare richten Sie bitte an den Listenadministrator:
wikide-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
It is not only the writing of RolfR. and
a signifcance part of the
german admins, it is their
far-right-wing political behavior which I
criticize. Till today FrankS., member of
the far-right-group "Schlagende
Verbindung
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_fencing>"
is responsible in the foundation for the
Outreach project.
A bad joke. Another bad joke is the
exclusion of the user Brummfuss,
he was founder of the Nazipedia-Warning
page
<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Brummfuss/Nazipedia>
which listed the
articles with right wing bias writers.
First the page was deleted,
and then Brummfuss
<http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Brummfuss>was
deleted.
I will continue to criticize that:
inside and outside of the WP-project.
Thomas7
(Pardon for my bad English).
More informations about the nazi- and
fascistoid problems in the german wikipedia:
http://thomas7.netau.net/
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 23:55:33 +0200 Tobias
Oelgarte<tobias.oelgarte(a)googlemail.com> wrote:
If you only write bullshit like this, then i know why you got blocked. I
know RalfR in person and he did never advocate anything related to the
right wing. Considering the given example you are completely
illusionary. RalfR did not take the image itself but uploaded it to
Wikiversity under the assumption that it falls under the "Zitatrecht",
which is not assumed for Wikipedia itself, because the community is not
100% (only 90%) sure that it would allow to "cite" such images, roughly
comparable to fair use on EN.
Whats next - Will you call him also an left wing otaku because he
suggested to me to write an article about Nagisa Furukawa?[1] Pure nonsense.
[1]
http://de.wikiversity.org/wiki/Kurs:Zeichnen_im_Stile_von_Manga_und_Anime_i…
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 15:42:12 -0700
From: Jay Walsh<jwalsh(a)wikimedia.org>
To: Wikimedia Mailing List<wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] O'Dwyer
Message-ID:
<CADmSKuHEtMkr7P2xAjZyhYQSqHnzGw93CTAEF0anCYx1fEFJ+g(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
It would be interesting to see the community
develop its own high profile
media contacts so this view can be communicated to the world!
If Jimmy can write this in The Guardian (a paper which really seems to like
him a lot),
---o0o---
Together, we won the battle against Sopa and Pipa. Together, we can win
this one too.
---o0o---
and it ends up copied in newspapers around the world,
https://news.google.co.uk/news/story?q=%22Together,+we+won+the+battle+again…
.,cf.osb&biw=1066&bih=743&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ncl=dgWkAFmBLjQBsNMJyGJqPnbvsPpkM&sa=X&ei=xXTrT8rQHYqp8QO_hqXVBQ&ved=0CC0QqgIwAA
attributed to the Wikipedia founder, then there really is no discernible
difference between his view and Wikipedia's, or Google's.
Hi folks - I'm a bit late to this thread, but I wanted to chime in. The
Communications Committee list/group brought up the issue of some wildly
inaccurate headlines on this story over the last 48hrs, and with their help
and some outreach we've tried to get some corrections.
The press is going to make a very logical, if occasionally wildly
inaccurate, series of judgements on how to frame this whole topic/issue up.
Headlines are commonly over-generalized to the point of being dead wrong -
"Wikipedia backs Richard O'Dwyer petition" etc.
The Wikimedia (chapter etc) folks who work with the press around the world
are regularly doing everything possible to avoid the overly general
summaries that come out in the media. We (and certainly WMF) are highly
sensitive to incorrect facts, and generally the media actually appreciate
it when we're able to reach out and get corrections. Wikimedians and
readers of the stories who offer up comments/responses on stories - below
the story - can help with this too. In some cases we have relationships
with senior editors at outlets and can get things fixed quickly. In other
cases timezones and publication timelines make this harder to resolve.
I know how quickly a bad headline can spiral into more headlines and
echoing of false information. We hold the news outlets who originate those
stories and the ones that continue to repeat them accountable, and we ask
them to get it right.
Just wanted to let you know that there's almost always an effort underway
to get corrections recorded. Jimmy is also very sensitive to these facts
and frequently when he sees an issue in a story he was interviewed for he
writes directly to the reporter for a fix.
jay