Please for the love of God STOP SENDING ME EMAILS!!!
On May 29, 2007, at 1:46 PM, foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
wrote:
Send foundation-l mailing list submissions to
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
foundation-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of foundation-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Meta Ban (Alex Newman)
2. Re: Wikikids (Nicholas Moreau)
3. Re: Wikikids (Angela)
4. Re: Wikikids (teun spaans)
5. Re: Meta Ban (Azdiyy)
6. Re: Wikikids (Mathias)
7. Re: Wikikids (Samuel Klein)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:20:48 +0100
From: "Alex Newman" <alex9891(a)hotmail.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban
To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID: <BAY119-F21F2A735C12BF8C0B022468B2F0(a)phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Azdiyy wrote:
Hello,
Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if they
think their ban on meta is unjustified.
trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others)
led nowhere.
m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if meta is
not suitable
for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too
much imo.
many thanks,
azdiyy
------------------------------
Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not
Meta. Maybe
your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually looked
at all
your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather
unsuitable
to me.
Alex (Majorly)
_________________________________________________________________
New, exclusive and FREE - Download Madonna's "Hey You" now!
http://www.liveearth.msn.com
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:17:34 -0400
From: "Nicholas Moreau" <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Message-ID:
<2540ad290705290717u3e8d6658o378f8bba60ccbd2c(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and the
"English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
notes:
"GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
which means:
"USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO THIS
END AUTHORISATION!"
But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
Nick
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 15:41:14 +0100
From: Angela <beesley(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
<foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID:
<8b722b800705290741l46e9a095k4af5cecbe0fc43c4(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least
in the footer and
the
"English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
notes:
"GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
This is just the default message in MediaWiki. You can see the same
thing in the original version of the Dutch Wikipedia -
http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning&oldid=178550
But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there
doesn't seem to be any
obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
The wiki is GFDL. The edit page links to
http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:Auteursrechten which
says that the text on Wikikids is released under the same licence as
on Wikipedia, namely the GFDL.
Angela
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:44:04 +0200
From: "teun spaans" <teun.spaans(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
<foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID:
<8fb899d70705290744g577e2797p451de62dca21db72(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
This is just a warning that users should not use copyrighted
material unless
they have permission.
It is a bit out of sight, but another page says:
De teksten op Wikikids worden vrijgegeven onder dezelfde licentie
als op
Wikipedia <http://nl.wikipedia.org/>, namelijk de
GFDL-licentie<http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html>
The texts on wikikids are being made available under the same
license as
Wikipeda, that is the GFDL license.
I wish you health and happiness,
teun spaans
On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least
in the footer and
the
"English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
notes:
"GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>
> which means:
>
> "USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO
> THIS
> END AUTHORISATION!"
>
But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there
doesn't seem to be any
obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>
> Nick
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:25:48 +0100
From: Azdiyy <azdiyy(a)googlemail.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
<foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID:
<6af34c650705290825k5479f911n8ae92ca2339dc15e(a)mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
if they're unsuitable, what about warning the 'offender' or a short
ban?
Azdiyy
On 29/05/07, Alex Newman <alex9891(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
Azdiyy wrote:
Hello,
Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if
they
think their ban on meta is unjustified.
trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others)
led nowhere.
m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if
meta is
not suitable
for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too
much imo.
many thanks,
azdiyy
------------------------------
Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not
Meta. Maybe
your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually
looked at all
your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather
unsuitable
to me.
Alex (Majorly)
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 19:19:42 +0200
From: Mathias <mathias.damour(a)laposte.net>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
<foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID: <465C60AE.D7FA4210(a)laposte.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Hi,
Robert Horning a ?crit :
mathias.damour wrote:
Another point is that Wikijunior "only"
aims to produce and
offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
want children to be involved in building this content. We want
to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
See this article :
http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
I have serious doubts about the ability of children to get
involved in
this process, other than to the extent that they already are involved
with Wikimedia projects. There are minors (including some that have
administrator access... as discussed in some earlier threads) who are
involved with Wikipedia content (and a few I suspected on
Wikibooks as
well), but these tend to be kids that are exceptionally
motivated. And
they participate on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects as
peers to
everybody else who is a contributor, with no special distinction.
While
the idea of having kids write for kids sounds appealing on paper, a
bunch of 4th graders write like... well... a bunch of 4th
graders. They
are still trying to learn the basic mechanics of writing, and
ought to
be learning how to write from those who have already mastered the
skill,
not from those who are still apprentices in the subject. I
digress if
you think some contributors on Wikipedia don't know how to write, but
that more or less proves my point as well.
It would be nice to have a feed-back from those who are involved in
the
Wikikids.nl project on this point.
I would say a few things :
- We choosed not to make special distinction related to age on
Vikidia (no
more than on Wikipedia). It is just asked that if you tell your age
on your
user page, you shouldn't cheat about it, just as you shouldn't
cheat about
your Diploma/academic degree on Wikipedia. (It's written in the
disclaimer
that a user could be blocked if he cheat about his age, but that you
shouldn't assumed that it has been checked.)
- 8-13 years is the readers target age. They are welcomed to edit, but
adults so as - say - 13-18 years are welcomed too. We could guess that
quite a lot of these (teenagers) could be willing to edit in a
wiki, but
don't feel able to do it on Wikipedia. They can be pleased to do it
for
younger people. That's what happen on Vikidia, where teenage
editors are
quite importants.
- it seems that children are not able to write as much as older
people,
but they could do a quite good job on one subject. Anyway, it's a
wiki so
their articles are to be bettered by others (which can be formative
to them).
They can aslo get involved in maintenance task (internal links...)
which
make them become active readers rather than only content recipient.
Participation of children is nevertheless something like a pillar for
these wikis.
What I'm trying to point out is that those
who are involved with
Wikijunior were not even contacted about this idea in the first place
when the idea was originally brought up on Meta, and suggestions
on Meta
to look at the Wikijunior project as perhaps something to work
with were
met with incredible hostility by those suggesting this Wikikids
project. This doesn't have to be an either-or situation, as I
believe
the sum is healthier than the individual parts alone.
I'm not sure I understand well ; "This doesn't have to be an either-or
situation" do you mean that they can be book for children AND
adults on
Wikibooks, or that they can be wikibooks AND an encyclopedia for
children.
That's what I would say.
I am presuming that you are writing about this
because you want to
seek
input from the Wikimedia community, and would like to enlist
support for
those who might want to get involved with a project of this
nature. I'm
merely suggesting here that there are individuals who may want to
join
in this sort of project, and you should try to join with these
efforts.
There have been some attempts in the past to move Wikijunior to a
completely separate project and domain name, including forming
Wikijunior as a completely independent Wikimedia sister project.
One of
these proposals, and not rejected by the Wikijunior community, was to
move to a more Wikipedia-like format of articles rather than the
themed
collections organized into books such as currently exist on
Wikibooks.
Please ask those involved with the development of Wikijunior to at
least
comment on your ideas. For English Wikijunior, the best place is at
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:Wikijunior
What all this concept is lacking is a very motivated leader who is
willing to take the next step and demonstrate that there is a large
concensus among those want to go this route. And unlike the problems
that existed with Wikiversity on Wikibooks, there is virtually nobody
who wants to see Wikijunior "kicked off" of Wikibooks. Wikijunior
enjoys a nearly independent existence without having to worry
about the
project overhead of maintaining a separate group of admins, and a
strongly symbiotic relationship exists as well between Wikibooks and
Wikijunior to bring new users and contributors to both projects. I
think that Wikijunior would struggle with a great many issues if
it had
an independent existence at the moment that it doesn't have to worry
about right now.
I had a look to the wikijunior pages in english and french. On the
english
talk page, the topic on a separated website is about either a read-
only
website for safe reading for children, or a separate wikibooks. I can
understand that if wikijunior should still aim to writes books,
there is
no determining utility to make a separate wiki for it.
But the wikikids idea is quite different, since it has a "Wikipedia-
like
format" as you say, and for it aims to let children write on it.
I don't know if wikijunior could (and would like) to move to that, and
anyway "This doesn't have to be an either-or situation" ;-)
Mathias Damour
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:49:11 -0400 (EDT)
From: Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
<foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705291321090.25804(a)hera.hcs.harvard.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="x-unknown"
There are a few issues here, which should perhaps be addressed by more
than one project.
1) Simplifying language
Finding a way to provide versions of articles targeted at different
audiences -- different levels of jargon or language complexity --
would
be a valuable achievement. Our early effort with Simple-English
remains
a hack which needs improvement and localization.
Examples: simple english, simple spanish
2) Writing for children
There is a long tradition of providing children with books about the
world, including drawings, games, and activities; with a shift in
focus,
layout, and tone from more general encyclopedias. At the same time, I
believe that most full-length English encyclopedias have for
decades been
primarily marketed for home use by schoolchildren...
Examples: Andrew Cates' SOS selection of Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Wikipedia_CD_Selection
Wikijunior
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikijunior
3) Projects by and for children
There is a need for space for younger authors to develop and share
their
own work. This may or may not be directly related to one of the above
projects.
Examples: Few. UNICEF's Voices of Youth project offers some space
for
this sort of collaboration among their young contributors.
4) Packaging things into books v. ongoing development of articles
This has been a slightly confusing distinction since we started
putting
'books' into digital form, breaking the traditions of bound and
printed
works one by one. There are useful distinctions b/t wikipedia and
wikibooks, and likewise between a children's encyclopedia idea and
wikijunior, but they are as much philosophical as unavoidable. This
is especially true as books become more and more modular, and parts of
books are used in multiple works.
-----
It would be good to start a discussion and collaboration including
interested groups... and to seed a children's encyclopedia with
some of
the existing material that is in other formats.
The advantage to 3) over the others is that projects whose primary
audience can contribute directly to their development have an
excellent
model for sustained growth.
SJ
On Mon, 28 May 2007, mathias.damour wrote:
Hi,
Robert Horning wrote:
Mathias wrote:
>
> Such a wiki has been launched in french (in which I am
involved) see an
english explanation about it:
http://fr.vikidia.org/index.php/Vikidia:About and in Dutch
(see
http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:English_explanation
None of them are Wikimedia project.)
> Both have a quite active community and have
reached 1000
articles.
(...)
And Wikijunior is also quite multilingual, with some sort of
Wikijunior project on nearly every language edition of
Wikibooks,
including French, German, Italian, Spanish,
Chinese, and
English. In
many cases these "articles" or
"modules" have been translated or
rewritten in multiple languages as well, especially the original
Wikijunior books of the Solar System and the Big Cats.
And Wikijunior is clearly a Wikimedia project in its own
right, other
than it is hosted concurrently with Wikibooks.
Try
http://en.wikijunior.org/ to see where the wikijunior domain
goes.
This isn't to say that some effort shouldn't happen to
perhaps expand
the range of this proposal, but it seems like the
largest
problem it has
faced is an ever fragmenting community and
leaders who
havn't had the
desire to keep the project moving. Writing
literary content for
children is not an easy task, and it takes a focused
community to keep
the project growing.
Wikijunior is clearly a wikibooks project. I mean that it is
not a Wikipedia-like project, and being hosted on the
wikibooks wiki makes impossible several feature of Wikipedia.
For example you can't make easy internal wikilinks : wikilink
to "Aluminum" is not [[Aluminum]] but [[Wikijunior The
Elements/Aluminum]]. The "oxygen" page:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior_The_Elements/Oxygen
should only tell about the element, not the dioxygen gas. (it
does indeed, and doesn't make it clear between one and the
other) and it doesn't make it easy to create another page
about the gas, since this wikibooks is about the elements.
Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and
offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
want children to be involved in building this content. We want
to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
See this article :
http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
I don't think that "fragmenting community and leaders" is a
real danger now that several Wikipedia have reached such a
huge size both in articles and in editors.
Some people have had the idea to make either special articles
or a special wiki for children of each grade, or even for each
grade AND each school. (because you would have to explain in a
different way to a 9 years old child than to a 12 years old)
see this discusion:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Talk:Wikis_for_children) I feel that
it would be "fragmenting community" and that one single
encyclopedic wiki for 8 to 13 year old children and for one
language is a fair middle.
As for the health of Wikijunior books, many of
them have reached
"featured book" status as some of the "best of..."
Wikibooks,
and on
en.wikbooks I would say that you could easily get
much more
than 1000
modules that could easily seed an en.wikikids
project. Many
of these
modules could on their own reach featured article
status on
en.wikipedia, but for the fact they are not on Wikipedia.
Rather than
try to dissect what went wrong with the previous
attempt at
an English
language version of this project, I would suggest
that you
try and see
what has been done "right" by
Wikijunior and its development
community.
And certainly try to pool the efforts of this
"Wikikids"
group and those
who are writing "Wikijunior" content.
I have not seen any
effort to
recruit those involved with Wikijunior to help
with this
proposal in any
meaningful way.
Do you tell about this attempt ?
http://editthis.info/wikikidsen/Main_Page I didn't look at it
closely, but I am afraid that it wasn't lead in a proper way.
Another think is that there is "simple english wikipedia",
whom no other equivalent have been created in any other
language. I guess that it would make less easy to create a
wikikids in english, as it would be partly similar to simple,
and I would also say that the fact that this wiki is not so
big and hasn't been created in other language may show that
its aim would not be so clear, mobilizing and justifying.
The idea to seed from wikijunior could be good, so as the idea
to create such wiki on the Vikidia and Wikikids.nl model.
I can't say about Wikikids.nl, but if by chance they would be
some encyclopedic wikis dedicated to children to open in other
language, Vikidia (in french) would rather become a wikimedia
project and work on it together than see them created by
isolated groups in each language.
Hope to hear from you,
Mathias Damour
Cr?ez votre adresse ?lectronique prenom.nom(a)laposte.net
1 Go d'espace de stockage, anti-spam et anti-virus int?gr?s.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 38, Issue 101
*********************************************