A new policy proposal has been created, titled "Administrator Activity
Policy". It can be found at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_Activity_Proposal.
Discussion is set to last two weeks followed by a two week vote. Feel
free to direct your comments to the talk page thereof.
~Grunt (Steven Melenchuk)
The question has come up on [[Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images]] about
images licensed under the UN license. That license says:
"UN photographs can be reproduced for editorial purposes only. They may not
be used in advertising. All photos used must show the UN Photo credit line."
Personally I think these images are "free enough", as they could be used by
any encyclopedia, commercial or non-commercial. But a couple people have
argued against this.
I'd like to invite anyone interested to comment at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Possibly_unfree_images
----- Forwarded message from Hess Nadine ED-AVSLV <Nadine.Hess(a)sg.ch> -----
From: "Hess Nadine ED-AVSLV" <Nadine.Hess(a)sg.ch>
Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 11:38:17 +0200
To: <jwales(a)bomis.com>
Subject: Copyrights
Dear Sir Wales
At the end of 2004 our publishing house bringts out the booklet "aktuell". For this purpose we wanna use a picture on your website (see below)
prisma.png
Since it concerns a Non profit project for our school children we are dependent on each support. We are extremely grateful, if you can give us the picture either free of charge or to a special price to the order. We may ask you to answer up to the 10.10.2004. For a well-meaning examination of our inquiry we thank you cordially
Yours sincerelly
Nadine Hess
Sekretariat
Beratung und Verkauf
Kant. Lehrmittelverlag St.Gallen
Washingtonstrasse 34
Postfach
CH-9401 Rorschach
Telefon: +41 071 846 60 91
Telefax: +41 071 841 79 94
E-Mail: nadine.hess(a)sg.ch
Internet: www.lehrmittelverlag.ch
----- End forwarded message -----
--
"La nèfle est un fruit." - first words of 50,000th article on fr.wikipedia.org
Dear Sirs:
I found a round sterling silver tray. On it there is an ivy leaf and
following is engraved:
The 2950 Members of Princeton Ivy Club
Robert M. Brewer W.Boulton Kelly, Jr.
William F. Clarkson, Jr. Ghomas E. Kilby,III
James M. Earl George C. Matthiessen
John S. Gray Benjamin H. Murray
Charles D. Halsey, Jr. Ajlbert J. Redfway, Jr.
Stehphen S. Halsey Franklin D.Reeve
Chalmers Handy W. Cameron Slack
David L. Hopkins, Jr. James C. Taylor
Sonstantine Hutchins, Jr. Owen J. Toland, Jr.
Paul M. Ingersoll Paul C. Van Dyke
Philip T. Zabriskie
I am not a professional internet user. I tried through Google to see anything under "The 1950 Members of Princeton Ivy Club" and some sites appeard but nothing related to 1950 members or their names. I am just curious, did each of the above name had one tray ? Or only one tray was engraved all above names and this tray was in a museum? Ivy Club Museum? How can I get in touch either with one of the above names or the establishment "Ivy Club", in order to be able to find out more.
You may not be able to help me at all. That I understand and I thank you very much in advance for your cooperation.
Sincerely yours,
Yashar Karaer
Andrew Lih wrote:
> It's up to you to consider the value of responding to these folks. :)
Ah, but the problem is that, as a grassroots effort, we have no control
over the impulses of our participants. Our more... fanatic... devotees
are likely to respond to this latest slight with mouths a-foaming and
fingers a-misspelling.
I plan to counter El Reg's criticisms by improving articles. AFAIC it's
the only appropriate response.
--
Jim Redmond
jim(a)scrubnugget.com
There is something I do not understand.
Some editors are putting some "clean up" flag on some articles. The
resulting information is ugly and defacing the article. There is no
indication of why the article should be cleaned up, neither in the talk
page, nor in the clean up page.
Ex : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flax or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheat
I doubt not there is still work to do on the articles, just as on most
articles. Why showing so much to our readers the imperfections ? What
about not just putting per default this flag on ALL articles ? Why just
not fixing the article you think is bad instead of mentionning so
proeminently it is bad ?
How long will these flags stay up ?
Would it not be nicer to have a less visible mention on the article
itself at least ? If putting the flag is necessary to mark them and have
them listed for improvement, could it be made more discreet ?
>Which is what is almost always done. Very few articles are actually
>deleted.
>
>-Matt
What are you talking about? Atleast 60% of the listed articles are deleted,
meaning almost 100 articles per week. You can see for yourself if you look
at and old revision like this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion&old…
_________________________________________________________________
STOP MORE SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Could whoever has the relevant database access please remove this
version
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?
>> title=%d6d%f6n_von_Horv%e1th&action=edit&oldid=6312577
of the [[Ödön von Horváth]] article history?
It included <!-- commented out --> German text (for translation) which
has subsequently been found to be an apparent violation of 3rd party
copyrights.
The current version is a simple stub which no longer includes the
offending text.
-- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]]
www.ropersonline.com
Brockhaus "must concede defeat" to Wikipedia
c't, the popular german magazine for computer engineering, just
released a study they conducted of the three major digital
encyclopedias in germany -- Brockhaus, Encarta, and (most recently)
Wikipedia. They tested the encyclopedias on breadth, depth, and
comprehensibility of content, ease of searching, and quality of
multimedia content.
The content test was the most elaborate : first they divided content
in three broad fields, Science, Society, and Culture. They further
subdivided these into 22 total subject areas, and within each subject
selected an easy, a moderate, and a difficult topic. They then
searched for the best matching article (and supplementary content) in
the encyclopedia.
Finally, they brought in experts in each broad field who rated the
articles from 1 to 5, based on technical correctness and completeness
of the texts, and on their comprehensibility. Once this was finished,
the results were totalled at each level of conceptual difficulty,
within each broad field, and across all 66 topics.
The net result: Wikipedia ran away with the top prize, a comfortable
distance ahead of its stately predecessors. "Brockhaus Premium
surpassed the competition from Redmond," the review reported, "but
must however concede defeat to Wikipedia".
Happily, the full breakdown of the experts' ratings were published
along with the article, so that each encyclopedia may benefit from the
spot check.
A full translation will be available on meta presently :
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia vs Brockhaus and Encarta
Grab a copy of the original at your local international-pubs shop, if you can.
http://www.heise.de/ct/
Encyclopedias: Wikipedia vs. Brockhaus and Encarta (pg. 132)
--
+sj+
The S.African Mail and Guardian online cottons to us: they like the
"crushed out of existence" quote, too.
http://www.mg.co.za/Content/l3.asp?cg=Insight-Online&o=138404&sa=106
Cosmodelia from Barcelona introduces Wikiversity to "the Interzone"
http://www.interpc.fr/mapage/westernlands/reportsept04.html
...and Vivisimo's "clusty.com", "powered completely by breakthrough
clustering technology" [and buzzwords], "changes forever how consumers
do general Web searches as well as shopping, blogs, gossip, images,
Wikipedia and people searches".
Aside from having a name my friend's kid brother would have picked out
of a hat for his domain-squatting business, this is really neat. They
have a separate tab for searching wikipedia. What do you know, our
main page looks pretty good in that blue-on-taupe color scheme.
http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Sep/1078405.htm
--
+sj+