Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
*Twitter:*The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
*Facebook/G+:*The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
+Rob as well.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
*Twitter:*The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
*Facebook/G+:*The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on Michael's advice on searches for that term though.
best, Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
*Twitter:*The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
*Facebook/G+:*The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think it's needed either.
It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article across and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either passive or actively aggressive ;)
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on Michael's advice on searches for that term though.
best, Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
*Twitter:*The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
*Facebook/G+:*The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- *Joe Sutherland* Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu http://twitter.com/jrbsu | w: JSutherland https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
(readding Gamaliel)
Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this case.
The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE] https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think it's needed either.
It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article across and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either passive or actively aggressive ;)
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on Michael's advice on searches for that term though.
best, Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
Twitter:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
Facebook/G+:
The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll look to get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach.
Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(readding Gamaliel)
Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this case.
The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think it's needed either.
It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article
across
and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either
passive
or actively aggressive ;)
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland <
jsutherland@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on Michael's advice on searches for that term though.
best, Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
Twitter:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women,
but
#Wikipedia has them all.
Facebook/G+:
The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women,
but
#Wikipedia has them all.
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Sounds great—thanks, all!
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll look to get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach.
Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(readding Gamaliel)
Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this case.
The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think it's needed either.
It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article
across
and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either
passive
or actively aggressive ;)
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland <
jsutherland@wikimedia.org>
wrote:
LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on Michael's advice on searches for that term though.
best, Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic
bias
than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
Twitter:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women,
but
#Wikipedia has them all.
Facebook/G+:
The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women,
but
#Wikipedia has them all.
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- *Joe Sutherland* Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu http://twitter.com/jrbsu | w: JSutherland https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g. https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m... or https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi... IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll look to get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach.
Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(readding Gamaliel)
Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this case.
The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think it's needed either.
It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article across and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either passive or actively aggressive ;)
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on Michael's advice on searches for that term though.
best, Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
Twitter:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
Facebook/G+:
The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m... or https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi... IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll look
to
get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach.
Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(readding Gamaliel)
Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this case.
The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think
it's
needed either.
It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article across and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either passive or actively aggressive ;)
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on Michael's advice on searches for that term though.
best, Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi all,
We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic bias than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit into passive-aggressive territory.
Twitter:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
Facebook/G+:
The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous women, but #Wikipedia has them all.
-- Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
That could be mitigated by cropping. (I assume you are talking about the illustration for the tweet - apologies if that was about the gallery examples in WordPress instead.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m... or https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi... IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll look to get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach.
Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(readding Gamaliel)
Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this case.
The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think it's needed either.
It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article across and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either passive or actively aggressive ;)
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on Michael's advice on searches for that term though.
best, Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote: > > Hi all, > > We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic > bias > than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog. > > > > > https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers > > Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit > into > passive-aggressive territory. > > Twitter: > > The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous > women, > but > #Wikipedia has them all. > > Facebook/G+: > > The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous > women, > but > #Wikipedia has them all. > > -- > Ed Erhart > Editorial Intern > Wikimedia Foundation > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
That was about the gallery example, yes—no worries. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
That could be mitigated by cropping. (I assume you are talking about the illustration for the tweet - apologies if that was about the gallery examples in WordPress instead.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m...
or
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi...
IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll
look
to get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach.
Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(readding Gamaliel)
Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this case.
The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think it's needed either.
It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article across and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit
either
passive or actively aggressive ;)
James Alexander Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote: > > LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on > Michael's advice on searches for that term though. > > best, > Joe > > On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org
wrote:
>> >> Hi all, >> >> We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with
systemic
>> bias >> than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog. >> >> >> >> >>
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
>> >> Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit >> into >> passive-aggressive territory. >> >> Twitter: >> >> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous >> women, >> but >> #Wikipedia has them all. >> >> Facebook/G+: >> >> The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous >> women, >> but >> #Wikipedia has them all. >> >> -- >> Ed Erhart >> Editorial Intern >> Wikimedia Foundation >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Social-media mailing list >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> > > > > -- > Joe Sutherland > Communications Intern [remote] > m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
A quick ping on this to make sure the social gets out. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
That was about the gallery example, yes—no worries. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
That could be mitigated by cropping. (I assume you are talking about the illustration for the tweet - apologies if that was about the gallery examples in WordPress instead.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m...
or
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi...
IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll
look
to get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach.
Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
(readding Gamaliel)
Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in
this
case.
The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to
without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement:
The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE]
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work.
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote: > Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think > it's > needed either. > > It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the
article
> across > and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit
either
> passive > or actively aggressive ;) > > James Alexander > Community Advocacy > Wikimedia Foundation > (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland > jsutherland@wikimedia.org > wrote: >> >> LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based
on
>> Michael's advice on searches for that term though. >> >> best, >> Joe >> >> On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org
wrote:
>>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with
systemic
>>> bias >>> than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
>>> >>> Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit >>> into >>> passive-aggressive territory. >>> >>> Twitter: >>> >>> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous >>> women, >>> but >>> #Wikipedia has them all. >>> >>> Facebook/G+: >>> >>> The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous >>> women, >>> but >>> #Wikipedia has them all. >>> >>> -- >>> Ed Erhart >>> Editorial Intern >>> Wikimedia Foundation >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Social-media mailing list >>> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Joe Sutherland >> Communications Intern [remote] >> m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Social-media mailing list >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Oh damn, missed this this morning. Tomorrow or Monday?
On 9 August 2015 at 00:15, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
A quick ping on this to make sure the social gets out. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
That was about the gallery example, yes—no worries. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
That could be mitigated by cropping. (I assume you are talking about the illustration for the tweet - apologies if that was about the gallery examples in WordPress instead.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m...
or
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi...
IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll
look
to get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach.
Joe
On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
> > (readding Gamaliel) > > Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in
this
> case. > > The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to
> without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as > follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog > link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement: > > The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous
women.
> Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE] > > >
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
> > I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work. > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander > jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote: > > Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't
think
> > it's > > needed either. > > > > It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the
article
> > across > > and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit
either
> > passive > > or actively aggressive ;) > > > > James Alexander > > Community Advocacy > > Wikimedia Foundation > > (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur > > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland > > jsutherland@wikimedia.org > > wrote: > >> > >> LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based
on
> >> Michael's advice on searches for that term though. > >> > >> best, > >> Joe > >> > >> On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org
wrote:
> >>> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with
systemic
> >>> bias > >>> than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
> >>> > >>> Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit > >>> into > >>> passive-aggressive territory. > >>> > >>> Twitter: > >>> > >>> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous > >>> women, > >>> but > >>> #Wikipedia has them all. > >>> > >>> Facebook/G+: > >>> > >>> The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous > >>> women, > >>> but > >>> #Wikipedia has them all. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Ed Erhart > >>> Editorial Intern > >>> Wikimedia Foundation > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Social-media mailing list > >>> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > >>> > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Joe Sutherland > >> Communications Intern [remote] > >> m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Social-media mailing list > >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Social-media mailing list > > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > > > > > > -- > Tilman Bayer > Senior Analyst > Wikimedia Foundation > IRC (Freenode): HaeB > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
I'd say tomorrow your time
Sent from my iPhone
James Alexander Legal and Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation +1 415-839-6885 x6716
On Aug 8, 2015, at 16:55, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Oh damn, missed this this morning. Tomorrow or Monday?
On 9 August 2015 at 00:15, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote: A quick ping on this to make sure the social gets out. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote: That was about the gallery example, yes—no worries. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote: That could be mitigated by cropping. (I assume you are talking about the illustration for the tweet - apologies if that was about the gallery examples in WordPress instead.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m... or https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi... IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote: > I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll look > to > get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach. > > Joe > > On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote: >> >> (readding Gamaliel) >> >> Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this >> case. >> >> The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter >> without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as >> follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog >> link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement: >> >> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. >> Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE] >> >> >> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/ >> >> I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work. >> >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander >> jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote: >> > Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think >> > it's >> > needed either. >> > >> > It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article >> > across >> > and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either >> > passive >> > or actively aggressive ;) >> > >> > James Alexander >> > Community Advocacy >> > Wikimedia Foundation >> > (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland >> > jsutherland@wikimedia.org >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on >> >> Michael's advice on searches for that term though. >> >> >> >> best, >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi all, >> >>> >> >>> We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic >> >>> bias >> >>> than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers >> >>> >> >>> Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit >> >>> into >> >>> passive-aggressive territory. >> >>> >> >>> Twitter: >> >>> >> >>> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous >> >>> women, >> >>> but >> >>> #Wikipedia has them all. >> >>> >> >>> Facebook/G+: >> >>> >> >>> The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous >> >>> women, >> >>> but >> >>> #Wikipedia has them all. >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Ed Erhart >> >>> Editorial Intern >> >>> Wikimedia Foundation >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Social-media mailing list >> >>> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Joe Sutherland >> >> Communications Intern [remote] >> >> m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Social-media mailing list >> >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Social-media mailing list >> > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Tilman Bayer >> Senior Analyst >> Wikimedia Foundation >> IRC (Freenode): HaeB >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Social-media mailing list >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > > > > > -- > Joe Sutherland > Communications Intern [remote] > m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland _______________________________________________ Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Err, realizing that "tomorrow" your time is actually Monday I meant Sunday morning(ish) GMT makes sense to me :)
Sent from my iPhone
James Alexander Legal and Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation +1 415-839-6885 x6716
On Aug 8, 2015, at 16:55, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Oh damn, missed this this morning. Tomorrow or Monday?
On 9 August 2015 at 00:15, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote: A quick ping on this to make sure the social gets out. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote: That was about the gallery example, yes—no worries. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote: That could be mitigated by cropping. (I assume you are talking about the illustration for the tweet - apologies if that was about the gallery examples in WordPress instead.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m... or https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi... IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote: > I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway. I'll look > to > get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach. > > Joe > > On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote: >> >> (readding Gamaliel) >> >> Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in this >> case. >> >> The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to Twitter >> without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet as >> follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the blog >> link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement: >> >> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous women. >> Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE] >> >> >> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/ >> >> I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work. >> >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander >> jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote: >> > Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't think >> > it's >> > needed either. >> > >> > It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the article >> > across >> > and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit either >> > passive >> > or actively aggressive ;) >> > >> > James Alexander >> > Community Advocacy >> > Wikimedia Foundation >> > (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland >> > jsutherland@wikimedia.org >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia based on >> >> Michael's advice on searches for that term though. >> >> >> >> best, >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi all, >> >>> >> >>> We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with systemic >> >>> bias >> >>> than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers >> >>> >> >>> Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little bit >> >>> into >> >>> passive-aggressive territory. >> >>> >> >>> Twitter: >> >>> >> >>> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous >> >>> women, >> >>> but >> >>> #Wikipedia has them all. >> >>> >> >>> Facebook/G+: >> >>> >> >>> The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous >> >>> women, >> >>> but >> >>> #Wikipedia has them all. >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Ed Erhart >> >>> Editorial Intern >> >>> Wikimedia Foundation >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Social-media mailing list >> >>> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Joe Sutherland >> >> Communications Intern [remote] >> >> m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Social-media mailing list >> >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Social-media mailing list >> > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Tilman Bayer >> Senior Analyst >> Wikimedia Foundation >> IRC (Freenode): HaeB >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Social-media mailing list >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > > > > > -- > Joe Sutherland > Communications Intern [remote] > m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Joe Sutherland Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland _______________________________________________ Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
This is now out! Sorry for the delay.
FB: https://www.facebook.com/wikipedia/posts/10153443589758346
@Wikipedia: https://twitter.com/Wikipedia/status/630409490932875264 @Wikimedia: https://twitter.com/Wikimedia/status/630409490928660480
WP G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/100123345029543043288/+Wikipedia/posts/CozDPK3... WMF G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/108193079736330787108/108193079736330787108/po...
On 9 August 2015 at 01:38, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Err, realizing that "tomorrow" your time is actually Monday I meant Sunday morning(ish) GMT makes sense to me :)
Sent from my iPhone
James Alexander Legal and Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation +1 415-839-6885 x6716
On Aug 8, 2015, at 16:55, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Oh damn, missed this this morning. Tomorrow or Monday?
On 9 August 2015 at 00:15, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
A quick ping on this to make sure the social gets out. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
That was about the gallery example, yes—no worries. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
That could be mitigated by cropping. (I assume you are talking about the illustration for the tweet - apologies if that was about the gallery examples in WordPress instead.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
(BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about the blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images, but regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original fairly well. See e.g.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m...
or
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi...
IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not, I can add a bit later.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote: > I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway.
I'll look
> to > get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach. > > Joe > > On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
>> >> (readding Gamaliel) >> >> Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in
this
>> case. >> >> The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to
>> without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet
as
>> follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the
blog
>> link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement: >> >> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous
women.
>> Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE] >> >> >>
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
>> >> I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work. >> >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander >> jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote: >> > Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't
think
>> > it's >> > needed either. >> > >> > It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the
article
>> > across >> > and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit
either
>> > passive >> > or actively aggressive ;) >> > >> > James Alexander >> > Community Advocacy >> > Wikimedia Foundation >> > (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur >> > >> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland >> > jsutherland@wikimedia.org >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia
based on
>> >> Michael's advice on searches for that term though. >> >> >> >> best, >> >> Joe >> >> >> >> On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org
wrote:
>> >>> >> >>> Hi all, >> >>> >> >>> We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with
systemic
>> >>> bias >> >>> than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
>> >>> >> >>> Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little
bit
>> >>> into >> >>> passive-aggressive territory. >> >>> >> >>> Twitter: >> >>> >> >>> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous >> >>> women, >> >>> but >> >>> #Wikipedia has them all. >> >>> >> >>> Facebook/G+: >> >>> >> >>> The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous >> >>> women, >> >>> but >> >>> #Wikipedia has them all. >> >>> >> >>> -- >> >>> Ed Erhart >> >>> Editorial Intern >> >>> Wikimedia Foundation >> >>> >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Social-media mailing list >> >>> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> >>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Joe Sutherland >> >> Communications Intern [remote] >> >> m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Social-media mailing list >> >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> >> >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Social-media mailing list >> > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> Tilman Bayer >> Senior Analyst >> Wikimedia Foundation >> IRC (Freenode): HaeB >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Social-media mailing list >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > > > > > -- > Joe Sutherland > Communications Intern [remote] > m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media >
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- *Joe Sutherland* Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu http://twitter.com/jrbsu | w: JSutherland https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Going to propose more social for this - posting on a Sunday apparently isn't ideal ;)
Quotes, but not direct quotes (I don't want to be naming and shaming Taschen on social media if we can avoid it). Twitter's obviously cut down for brevity, hopefully it'll fit.
*Facebook:* • "We can question and argue about those omissions while publishers cannot recognize their own errors."
*Twitter:* • "We can question and argue about omissions while they cannot recognize their own errors."
On 9 August 2015 at 17:07, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
This is now out! Sorry for the delay.
FB: https://www.facebook.com/wikipedia/posts/10153443589758346
@Wikipedia: https://twitter.com/Wikipedia/status/630409490932875264 @Wikimedia: https://twitter.com/Wikimedia/status/630409490928660480
WP G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/100123345029543043288/+Wikipedia/posts/CozDPK3... WMF G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/108193079736330787108/108193079736330787108/po...
On 9 August 2015 at 01:38, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
Err, realizing that "tomorrow" your time is actually Monday I meant Sunday morning(ish) GMT makes sense to me :)
Sent from my iPhone
James Alexander Legal and Community Advocacy Wikimedia Foundation +1 415-839-6885 x6716
On Aug 8, 2015, at 16:55, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Oh damn, missed this this morning. Tomorrow or Monday?
On 9 August 2015 at 00:15, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
A quick ping on this to make sure the social gets out. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:11 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
That was about the gallery example, yes—no worries. :-)
--Ed
On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
That could be mitigated by cropping. (I assume you are talking about the illustration for the tweet - apologies if that was about the gallery examples in WordPress instead.)
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org wrote:
I reworded it, but to me, those images are a bit on the small side.
--Ed
On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
> > (BTW, as I'm re-reading that disclaimer, an offtopic remark about
the
> blog post itself: I think this one works OK with just two images,
but
> regarding "far more images than this platform can comfortably > accommodate", it's worth being aware that WordPress has a gallery > feature that can reproduce a layout such as in the Signpost original > fairly well. See e.g. > >
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/11/04/wikimedia-russia-tunguska-electronic-m...
> or >
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2014/09/05/celebrating-the-10th-anniversary-of-wi...
> IIRC it is also documented in the blog admin documentation; if not,
I
> can add a bit later.) > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Joe Sutherland > jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote: > > I think the disclaimer covers any doubts on that front anyway.
I'll look
> > to > > get this out tomorrow then, I think, for maximum reach. > > > > Joe > > > > On 7 August 2015 at 23:06, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org
wrote:
> >> > >> (readding Gamaliel) > >> > >> Yes, it goes a bit on the offensive, but I think that is fine in
this
> >> case. > >> > >> The blog post contains two PD images which can be uploaded to
> >> without licensing concerns. I would suggest to shorten the tweet
as
> >> follows so as to make room for one of them (in addition to the
blog
> >> link), which as we know can help a lot to increase engagement: > >> > >> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous
women.
> >> Wikipedia has them all. [IMAGE] > >> > >> > >>
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers/
> >> > >> I would tend towards choosing the painting, but both should work. > >> > >> On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 3:01 PM, James Alexander > >> jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote: > >> > Yeah, especially since we're posting from @Wikipedia I don't
think
> >> > it's > >> > needed either. > >> > > >> > It is a bit passive aggressive but it gets the point of the
article
> >> > across > >> > and I'm not sure it's possible to do that without being a bit
either
> >> > passive > >> > or actively aggressive ;) > >> > > >> > James Alexander > >> > Community Advocacy > >> > Wikimedia Foundation > >> > (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur > >> > > >> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Joe Sutherland > >> > jsutherland@wikimedia.org > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> LGTM. I don't think it's a good idea to hashtag Wikipedia
based on
> >> >> Michael's advice on searches for that term though. > >> >> > >> >> best, > >> >> Joe > >> >> > >> >> On 7 August 2015 at 22:51, Ed Erhart eerhart@wikimedia.org
wrote:
> >> >>> > >> >>> Hi all, > >> >>> > >> >>> We just published "Wikipedia better equipped to deal with
systemic
> >> >>> bias > >> >>> than traditional publishers" to the Wikimedia blog. > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>>
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/08/07/systemic-bias-wikipedia-vs-publishers
> >> >>> > >> >>> Comments on the tone would be appreciated—I veered a little
bit
> >> >>> into > >> >>> passive-aggressive territory. > >> >>> > >> >>> Twitter: > >> >>> > >> >>> The Basic Art series from @TASCHENBooks is missing 100 famous > >> >>> women, > >> >>> but > >> >>> #Wikipedia has them all. > >> >>> > >> >>> Facebook/G+: > >> >>> > >> >>> The Basic Art series from Taschen Books is missing 100 famous > >> >>> women, > >> >>> but > >> >>> #Wikipedia has them all. > >> >>> > >> >>> -- > >> >>> Ed Erhart > >> >>> Editorial Intern > >> >>> Wikimedia Foundation > >> >>> > >> >>> _______________________________________________ > >> >>> Social-media mailing list > >> >>> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > >> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > >> >>> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Joe Sutherland > >> >> Communications Intern [remote] > >> >> m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland > >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ > >> >> Social-media mailing list > >> >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > >> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > Social-media mailing list > >> > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Tilman Bayer > >> Senior Analyst > >> Wikimedia Foundation > >> IRC (Freenode): HaeB > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Social-media mailing list > >> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Joe Sutherland > > Communications Intern [remote] > > m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu | w: JSutherland > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Social-media mailing list > > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media > > > > > > -- > Tilman Bayer > Senior Analyst > Wikimedia Foundation > IRC (Freenode): HaeB > > _______________________________________________ > Social-media mailing list > Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
--
Ed Erhart Editorial Intern Wikimedia Foundation
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- *Joe Sutherland* Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu http://twitter.com/jrbsu | w: JSutherland https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- *Joe Sutherland* Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu http://twitter.com/jrbsu | w: JSutherland https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Going to propose more social for this - posting on a Sunday apparently isn't ideal ;)
Quotes, but not direct quotes (I don't want to be naming and shaming Taschen on social media if we can avoid it). Twitter's obviously cut down for brevity, hopefully it'll fit.
Still using the photo? (Same one? I think that's fine it was a nice one).
*Facebook:* • "We can question and argue about those omissions while publishers cannot recognize their own errors."
LGTM
*Twitter:* • "We can question and argue about omissions while they cannot recognize their own errors."
LGTM This should fit with 3 characters to spare (after the link and the image, assuming you're having the image still).
Thanks! I'll probably use the other image assuming we can get it to display nicely.
Joe
On 11 August 2015 at 02:11, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Joe Sutherland <jsutherland@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Going to propose more social for this - posting on a Sunday apparently isn't ideal ;)
Quotes, but not direct quotes (I don't want to be naming and shaming Taschen on social media if we can avoid it). Twitter's obviously cut down for brevity, hopefully it'll fit.
Still using the photo? (Same one? I think that's fine it was a nice one).
*Facebook:* • "We can question and argue about those omissions while publishers cannot recognize their own errors."
LGTM
*Twitter:* • "We can question and argue about omissions while they cannot recognize their own errors."
LGTM This should fit with 3 characters to spare (after the link and the image, assuming you're having the image still).
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
Going to get this out in a bit. Sorry for the delay!
best, Joe
On 11 August 2015 at 02:14, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks! I'll probably use the other image assuming we can get it to display nicely.
Joe
On 11 August 2015 at 02:11, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Joe Sutherland < jsutherland@wikimedia.org> wrote:
Going to propose more social for this - posting on a Sunday apparently isn't ideal ;)
Quotes, but not direct quotes (I don't want to be naming and shaming Taschen on social media if we can avoid it). Twitter's obviously cut down for brevity, hopefully it'll fit.
Still using the photo? (Same one? I think that's fine it was a nice one).
*Facebook:* • "We can question and argue about those omissions while publishers cannot recognize their own errors."
LGTM
*Twitter:* • "We can question and argue about omissions while they cannot recognize their own errors."
LGTM This should fit with 3 characters to spare (after the link and the image, assuming you're having the image still).
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- *Joe Sutherland* Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu http://twitter.com/jrbsu | w: JSutherland https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)
FB: https://www.facebook.com/wikipedia/posts/10153453760898346
@Wikipedia: https://twitter.com/Wikipedia/status/631506309343506432 @Wikimedia: https://twitter.com/Wikimedia/status/631506309326749696
WP G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/100123345029543043288/+Wikipedia/posts/efqScXi... WMF G+: https://plus.google.com/u/0/b/108193079736330787108/108193079736330787108/po...
On 12 August 2015 at 17:29, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Going to get this out in a bit. Sorry for the delay!
best, Joe
On 11 August 2015 at 02:14, Joe Sutherland jsutherland@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks! I'll probably use the other image assuming we can get it to display nicely.
Joe
On 11 August 2015 at 02:11, James Alexander jalexander@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Joe Sutherland < jsutherland@wikimedia.org> wrote:
Going to propose more social for this - posting on a Sunday apparently isn't ideal ;)
Quotes, but not direct quotes (I don't want to be naming and shaming Taschen on social media if we can avoid it). Twitter's obviously cut down for brevity, hopefully it'll fit.
Still using the photo? (Same one? I think that's fine it was a nice one).
*Facebook:* • "We can question and argue about those omissions while publishers cannot recognize their own errors."
LGTM
*Twitter:* • "We can question and argue about omissions while they cannot recognize their own errors."
LGTM This should fit with 3 characters to spare (after the link and the image, assuming you're having the image still).
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- *Joe Sutherland* Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu http://twitter.com/jrbsu | w: JSutherland https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)
-- *Joe Sutherland* Communications Intern [remote] m: +44 (0) 7722 916 433 | t: @jrbsu http://twitter.com/jrbsu | w: JSutherland https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:JSutherland_(WMF)
social-media@lists.wikimedia.org