Completely off topic, but I just '''had to''' send this, because of
it's humour value:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/1006/1news/1news56_11.smil
This is a Real video stream about Google opening its European HQ in
Dublin.
Note towards the end -- what essential inventory did they bring to
[[Baile Atha Cliath]]?
You couldn't make it up.
:-D
----- Original Message -----
From: "Delirium" <delirium(a)hackish.org>
> I don't know
> what the percentage is like for Europeans, but an absolutely miniscule
> percentage of Americans are involved in meta-type affairs
Let's exchange a bunch of your (US) existing projects fillers with a bunch
of our (French) new empty projects builders, then :-D
There will be two different Wikipedia meetups in the US in the upcoming
weeks, and I don't believe anyone has mentioned this on the mailing list
yet. Since it's hard to be sure people will see it in one place, I'm
spreading the word as widely as possible. One meetup is in Chicago on
Sunday, October 24th, because Jimbo plans to be in town. The other
meetup is in Seattle on Saturday, November 6th, at the fascinating new
downtown public library. More information on both gatherings is at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup
Interestingly enough, the Seattle meetup already has six firm
commitments, including people coming in from Vancouver, BC and Portland,
all without the draw of an appearance by our fearless leader. Meanwhile
only two people have signed up for the Chicago meetup, and that's
counting Jimbo himself. So I just have to ask, where are all the Chicago
Wikipedians? Is there nobody willing to make the trip even from
Wisconsin or Indiana (and Chicago's so much closer to the state line
than Seattle)? Doesn't anybody love Jimbo anymore?
--Michael Snow
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Bosnak" <abosnak(a)glcomm.com>
To: <daily-article-l-owner(a)wikimedia.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 12:30 PM
Subject: Stadium Pics
> -- Hello-How are you? My name is Andy Bosnak and I do photo research for
> General Learning Communications. Our company makes non-broadcast
> educational
> video supplements for textbooks. I would like permission to use some of
> your
> photos. I saw them at the website
> http://en.wikipedia.org/upload/0/04/Reliant_Park.jpg
> My deadline is Wednesday October 6, 2004.
> Please contact me to discuss details. Thank you.
>
> Andy Bosnak
> PhotoResearch
> General Learning Communications
> 847.205.3168
> abosnak(a)glcomm.com
>
To see who last edited a page click the "history" tab. You will see a
list of every edit made to that page.
I took a look at your web site. I see you have some novel ideas about
the nature of vacuum. It's always good to try new ways of thinking about
things, and I wish you all the luck with your hypothesis but please note
that we do not accept original research into Wikipedia.
Theresa
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Miller's Hotmail [mailto:misterblues39@hotmail.com]
Sent: 05 October 2004 15:31
To: wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Vacuum article and how to get in touch
Aloha!
I read an article about vacuum and others. I wonder if one can contact
the
author of an article or the person who did edit it last.
Steffen Schenk
-------
Vacuum was when the volume of the O - room was bigger
than the volume of the mass of it particles.
See my threads or those I replyed to:
http://209.25.203.234/search.php?
- type misterblues in the search field on the
upper right side
- click Search Now at the bottom of page
Go here and watch the video:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?E29515A09
My personal web space:
http://www.mdcc.de/note.image/
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Aloha!
I read an article about vacuum and others. I wonder if one can contact the
author of an article or the person who did edit it last.
Steffen Schenk
-------
Vacuum was when the volume of the O - room was bigger
than the volume of the mass of it particles.
See my threads or those I replyed to:
http://209.25.203.234/search.php?
- type misterblues in the search field on the
upper right side
- click Search Now at the bottom of page
Go here and watch the video:
http://makeashorterlink.com/?E29515A09
My personal web space:
http://www.mdcc.de/note.image/
> But we already incorporate fair use images. It's not fair use to uses
> someone's image to advertise your product - so what's theproblem with
> this licence?
> Theresa
I agree. As long as the image is usable in a commercial mirror, I think we
should allow it. Since Wikimedia refuses to define freeness itself, I'll go
to http://www.gnu.org/encyclopedia/free-encyclopedia.html. This page says
that a free encyclopedia requires permission of modification of images, but
the examples it gives are related to editorial modifications. I think this
license is well within the spirit of this definition.
> The problem is that one (for-profit) publisher of wikipedia which is not
> the wikimedia foundation could say: "hey, look what terrific
> images we have got in this publication"... And AFAIK that
> goes against that very license.
> Theresa
Seems to me that this would go against the license even if it was a
non-profit publisher doing that. But I don't see the big deal. The
publisher can just use a different image for eir ad.
> GFDL implies absolute freedom or nothing at all. In this spirit,
> Richard Stallman had two or three interventions in this mailing list
> some months ago.
I think you're thinking of public domain, not GFDL. GFDL is not absolute
freedom. Furthermore, we haven't committed ourselves to the GFDL, only the
spirit of the GFDL.
> But IANAL (and probably those images are not THAT terrific though :)
I'm not a lawyer either, so I'm relying on Jimmy Wales' assertion that
mixing *any* image with GFDL text is legally permitted. The question here
is whether or not we *should* use these images, not whether or not we
legally *can* use them.
> Pedro.
Anthony
I just discovered the [[Wikipedia:Wikipedia as a press source]] article
the other day. It did strike me, however, that several of the articles
that were referenced by less prestigious publications did not have any
external references. One example is the latest one that referenced Poker
- http://www.azcentral.com/ent/pop/articles/1001poker01.html. This
article had little in the way of references (I've since gone through the
history with a fine tooth comb and found a few from the original
article), but I'm still unsure where the information about the history
of Poker came from!
I don't mean to make this specific to the Poker article. What I'm
suggesting is that if the press references one of our articles on the
press source page that we can absolutely make sure that our references
are up to scratch and our facts correct. Otherwise we're going to burn a
lot of news writers (who should have known better and done their /own/
research - but this is besides the point), and make us look bad.
I know it's a fair amount of work, but I'm basically putting this out
for comment on the mailing list.
One last thing: when it comes to referencing, it's great to have a
References section - but unless we have proper footnotes that quote the
page number of a publication we got the material from this makes it
*extremely* difficult for fact checkers to actually verify the
information in the story. Which helps give rise to factual inaccuracies
and POV.
Cheers,
Ta bu shi da yu
User:pie4all88 has launched a new collaboration project dedicated to
computer and video game articles. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Gaming_Collaboration_of_the_week
for the project page. If you know of any gaming articles that are in
need of improvement, feel free to nominate them.
--Slowking Man
