Good day, everyone.
We have been offered a unique opportunity to create a new English
Wikireader, free of charge, in time for Wikimania. This is an experiment, being done in
collaboration with a print-on-demand company that takes great interest in
Wikipedia.
The idea is to produce a wikireader on the subject of Frankfurt (on Main,
not the Oder--sorry, couldn't resist). It should include the overview article on
Frankfurt, as well as articles about neighborhoods (Sachsenhausen, for
instance), important sites (Goethe House, for instance), cultural attractions,
events (the Book Fair comes to mind), and other relevant topics. Each article
should be of Feature article standard.
The book will contain approximately 50 pages -- 48-56 (books are printed in
multiples of 8 pages minimum), and include GNU-FDL data and some basic
front-matter about the Wikimedia Foundation as an introduction. They will be 8.5 x
11 and contain b/w images.
Sounds easy, huh? Well, the thing is we have to have all the material ready
by Monday, July 25. This includes a list of articles that should be included.
Special care should be taken that the articles and images do NOT contain any
copyvios.
The German Wikipedia has considerable experience preparing Wikireaders, and
we can learn a lot from them. Please see
_http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiReader_ (http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiReader) . If you
can speak German, and feel that there are any articles in German that are
missing in English, feel free to translate them, but please remember that time is
of essence here. I would like to draft the services of the Quarto staff to
help with the final copyedit, but everyone is encouraged to participate.
I will be away this weekend on a personal matter but hope to check my email
frequently. My access will be limited, however, so please keep Frankfurt
Wikireader as the subject line so that I can filter them.
In order to keep to the deadline, I propose that we have the final list of
articles ready by 9:00 pm New York time today, July 20. You may want to take a
look at the German Wikiportal for Frankfurt
(_http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal_Frankfurt_Rhein-Main_
(http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal_Frankfurt_Rhein-Main) ) for some ideas.
I have opened a listing page at
_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Danny/Frankfurt_Wikireader_
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Danny/Frankfurt_Wikireader) . You will notice that it is very basic right now. Feel free to do with it
what you will.
Good luck all,
Danny
To Whom It May Concern,
I am Jeannette Grealdine Sant from Malta, I wish if it is possible for you to find me the names of the Banks in England because my uncle Spiridione Sant, has died without the will, and we don't know where they are.He has been dead for four years now and he had money in the english banks.Just to see in which bank they are.I appreciate it if you send me an email of the Names of the Banks on this email : jesline_sant(a)hotmail.com. Thank you .
From:
Jeannette Sant
Maybe this is an example of how I can't find subjects on Wikipedia,
but I'd rather be proved clueless than right in this case.
I just stumbled across a copyvio notice on the article
[[1868 Expedition to Abyssinia]] which, after examining the
evidence with care, I felt was a case of an editor paraphrasing
the text of a source far enough to argue that copyright no longer
applied; however, the question whether this was plagiarism
remained.
So, attempting to be a good little editor, I began to track
down what Wikipedia's policy about plagiarism was (beyond my
assumption that it was bad), & after a good-faith search
(primarily looking at links to [[Plagiarism]] from articles in
the Wikipedia namespace -- which is where policy statements
usually live) discovered only two mentions about plagiarism:
* [[Wikipedia:Copyrights]], where it is discussed in a way to
suggest it is not a copyright violation; &
* [[Wikipedia:Your first article]], where it is mentioned
in a discussion of providing one's sources.
While this may appear to some as a case of Wikilawyering or
[[instruction creep]], I feel it is a serious omission in our
list of policies. I hope I'm not alone in saying that I don't
want to find any instances of plagiarism in Wikipedia. However,
I don't want to find this sort of thing creeping into Wikipedia
under the defense "It's not a copyright violation, it's plagiarism",
nor do I want unattributed paraphrases of sources being sent to
VfD, either speedy or regular, when a simple acknowledgement of
sources might solve the problem. And this is a case clearly
different than the "Cite sources" policy currently is, which is
intended to handle things like adding controversial material
without attributing them to a source.
It'd be nice to have some kind of Cleanup tag applied to force
the contributor to improve the language &/or supply the source
for the text -- but articles have languished on Cleanup for
months or years without being fixed.
But I'm willing to live with whatever the consensus is to
handle this problem -- even if it is to treat all suspected cases
as a copyvio. It's not that I'm asking for an easy solution here
(the issue of how much paraphrase is needed in this case clearly
pre-empts that), but a sense of what the community consensus is
when (& sadly, not "if") I have to fight this problem.
Geoff
Dear all,
as many of you know, we have started a survey on the motivation of
contributors to Wikipedia a week ago. So far, more than 150 participants
completed our online survey -- thanks a lot!
The questionnaire will be available until August 3 at:
http://www.unipark.de/uc/wikipedia/
We would like to invite everybody who is involved in one or more
Wikipedia projects as contributors, sysops or in community discussions
to answer the survey. This will take about 20 minutes. The questionnaire
is in English, but participants from other Wikipedias are of course
invited to take part as well.
We are also glad that a number of people have linked to our survey from
their blogs or set links on prominent Wikipedia pages. We even have a
Wikipedia page ourselves now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:University_of_W%C3%BCrzburg_survey%2…
To allow for reliable results, we hope that as many contributors as
possible complete the questionnaire. You would especially help us if you
could link to the survey or forward this e-mail to people who don't
regularly read this list.
The original announcement is available here:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-July/026281.html
Our project website is here:
http://www.psychologie.uni-wuerzburg.de/ao/research/wikipedia.php?lang=en
Thank you for your time and input, and best wishes from Wuerzburg,
Joachim Schroer
--
Joachim Schroer, Dipl.-Psych.
University of Wuerzburg
Department of Psychology II, Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Roentgenring 10
97070 Wuerzburg
Germany
Phone: +49 931 31 6062
Fax: +49 931 31 6063
http://www.psychologie.uni-wuerzburg.de/ao/staff/schroer.php
i am trying to find information on all the differences between the 64 lemans
and gto. i bought a 64 lemans last year and am saving up money to clone it to
a gto and i would like to do it correctly so everything is exactly right. i
know alot of the differences, but do not know them all. i stumbled across
your website and thought some one there might know. any information would be
appreciated. thanks
About the plagiarism issue, there's nothing wrong with taking information
wholesale if 1) it's not copyvio 2) it's encylopedic and suits the
encylopedic context. I personally think that if anyone finds their text on
Wikipedia and it was freely licensed or public domain, they wouldn't mind
anyway, as long as it was being used well (that's why they released it under
free license/public domain, no?), the only problem would be quality and
copyediting for language, which can be fixed easily. After all, we do take
things wholesale (with copyediting here and there) from the 1911 Encylopedia
Britannica....and no doubt the article will evolve after that. If anything,
it seems all the policies are sufficient. Copyright, manual of style,
reference to sources, and being encylopedic. There's no need for a
"plagiarism" guideline. If anything, any problems with plagiarism violates
one these issues. If they don't (ie. like 1911 Britannica), then I see no
problem.
Natalinasmpf
My website (http://www.antandsons.com ) consits of a lot of
informational content on the financial world that I believe could be of
interest to wiki searchers who are looking for this kind of
information. I originally tried to add a few links to some articles
that we have written to the external links section in some articles
where applicable, but someone said that I could not do this. However,
I think this content is very relevant and want to contribute to
wikipedia with "approval." How can I do this?
I would appreciate the feedback.
Thank you
I happened on this site
http://www.mathdaily.com/
using Wiki-en mathematics articles. Pleasant enough reading some of my
stuff there, but they make no reference I can see to WP or GFDL.
Charles
Hi, I've been blocked for breaking the 3RR on "The Sword of the Prophet". I freely admit it, though the violation was inadvertent. My problem is that the reason given on the block list includes the rider "has been warned at least once". A cursory glance at my talk page will show this is not true, in fact I was not warned at all, nor invited to revert. While I accept the imposition of the block as a measured punishment for my absent-mindedness, I resent the fact that the impression is given that I wilfully ignored a warning about reverting. I am unsure whether the fault lies with the administrator (Thryduulf) who blocked me, or the user (Jayjg) who filed the 3RR violation. Either way, I would like the statement corrected. Thanks,
Lapsed Pacifist
159.134.232.111
--
_______________________________________________
For the largest FREE email in Ireland (25MB) and 20MB of online file storage space - Visit http://www.campus.ie