>
> Thanks for the tipoff, hopefully if we ever do take advertising it won't be
> quite that mind numbingly bad. They certainly got the idea of dab pages,
> admins, inane edit wars (must check out [[Crystallography]] to see whether
> it currently says that if Topaz crystals make you drowzy or alert) and the
> potential conflict between the scientific and pseudo-scientific factions.
> But the net-nanny stuff is I suspect more a dig at corporate IT prudishness
> rather than at wikipedia - I once worked at a place where someone in IT had
> set the Internet censor software to the tightest porn threshold, not
> realising why that was known as the Saudi setting.
WereSpielChequers
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:04:18 -0500
> From: "kgnpaul(a)gmail.com" <kgnpaul(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia
> parod y
> To: "English Wikipedia" <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <4a68d056.1fba720a.7732.ffffa644(a)mx.google.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Parodies are compliments in my book. ?Sarcasm to flattery and all that.
> ?Look forward to a US available link.
>
> -- Sent from my Palm Pre
> David Gerard wrote:
>
>
> http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/922216/BBC-Radio-4-launches-Wikipedia-par…
>
> "LONDON - BBC Radio 4 is launching a "broadwebcasting" show parodying
> the internet by mocking pop-ups, search boxes and other aspects of
> online activity. Produced and directed by Pozzitive, the four-part
> series is called 'Bigipedia' and has taken its inspiration from
> Wikipedia. It airs from July 23 at 11pm."
>
> (That's 10pm UTC tonight, a bit over three hours from now.)
>
>
> - d.
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 22:39:51 +0100
> From: Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton(a)gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Brand Republic: BBC Radio 4 launches Wikipedia
> parod y
> To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> <a4359dff0907231439k1de0d8f2sa2da4f54dcd7a56(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> 2009/7/23 David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>:
> > 2009/7/23 kgnpaul(a)gmail.com <kgnpaul(a)gmail.com>:
> >
> >> Parodies are compliments in my book. ?Sarcasm to flattery and all that.
> ?Look forward to a US available link.
> >
> >
> > It'll be on the iPlayer, so UK people can listen again later and
> > theoretically record it to put up somewhere.
>
> Yeah, let's not suggest copy infringement, huh? ("Theoretically" isn't
> going to make any difference.)
>
>
>
>
fyi
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sage Ross <ragesoss+wikipedia(a)gmail.com>
Date: 2009/7/22
Subject: [Wikitech-l] Watchlistr.com, an outside site that asks for
Wikimedia passwords
To: wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
I'm not sure what to do about this; it seems like a good idea but a
major security risk:
http://www.watchlistr.com/ is a site that creates aggregate watchlists
across multiple projects. See
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Bounty_board#Transwiki_…
The user who made it has very little editing history, and the site
aggregates watchlists across multiple projects, but requires inputting
your Wikimedia password into the watchlistr.com site. I have no
specific reason to think it's a scam, but if I was trying to phish
passwords I would do something like this.
-Sage Ross (User:Ragesoss)
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/digitalrevolution/2009/07/wikipedia.shtml
"But Wikipedia is flawed in the way Ely Cathedral is flawed, imperfect
in the way a person you love is imperfect, and filled with conflict
and disagreement in the way a good conference or an effective
parliament is filled with argument."
- d.
[[Ian O'Brien]], Australian swimmer
[[Austin Nichols]], US actor
[[Cynna Kydd]], Australian netball player
[[Kevin O'Halloran]], Australian swimmer
[[Sandra Morgan]], Australian swimmer
All features articles, all lacking an image, even though they all have
appeared at big public events.
Hi,
I am writing here pretty much as a last resort. I have been blocked by
an admin for 1 month, but despite repeated requests for an explanation
as to which policy or guideline justifies my block, four admins so far
have declined to answer this. I consider this to be a simple question
to ask, and would expect no less than the ability for an admin to be
able to justify the block by citing applicable policy.
Please can someone look into this?
I also am concerned that four admins have chosen to decline the
unblock request without feeling it necessary to provide the
explanation requested.
In a court of law it's mandatory that the accused is given their
reasons, and the applicable statute or case law referred to. Is there
no similar requirement for justice within Wikipedia?
I also think there should be a facility for admins who operate outside
of the law (if it can be called that) to be able to face consequences
for their actions by some higher governing body - does such a body
exist?
Many thanks,
R E Broadley (User:Rebroad)
The Canadian government has asked for comments on copyright revision at
http://copyright.econsultation.ca/
It will accept comments until September 13. Amazingly this mostly
coincides with the time when most people interested in liberalized
copyright laws are away touring Europe or planting trees. When they
regain access to their electronic lifelines it may be too late to comment.
Promoters of these changes would really like Canada to fall in line with
the WIPO treaty that it signed a decade ago. They might have passed
their changes easily if they had been quick about it, but events over
the last 10 years have made this much more controversial then they would
have hoped.
There do not appear to be any rules that would prohibit comments by
non-Canadians.
Ec
I like having credit right at the article level. This is the typical
thing I see in print media (obviously as there is no other level). Are you
stating that this was discussed before and rejected? It's what I was thinking
might be a good way of getting more photo contributions. Just give credit
as a byline under the picture. Even include a link at the credit line to
an article on the photographer if one exists. To me credit, isn't
advertising. It's just attribution.
For example, in-article we give credit to quotations of text and those can
lead directly to the sale of a book by direct links, without the reader
needing to know that clicking an obscure item, like a picture, might lead
somewhere else.
Will Johnson
In a message dated 7/20/2009 10:36:10 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
carcharothwp(a)googlemail.com writes:
How many people click through to the image itself? That is where the
credit is, and the link onwards to the source. Would it help if the
source (if it was an institution, rather than an individual
photographer) was automagically credited in the articles, not just on
the image page? Or would that be the thin end of a wedge and be seen
as overt advertising? There are some photographer names that will
never be suitable to be treated this way, but if doing this for
reputable organisations made it more likely they would donate images,
is it worth looking at it again?
**************What's for dinner tonight? Find quick and easy dinner ideas
for any occasion.
(http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?ncid=emlcntusfood00000009)
Ladies and Gentlemen,
As you may be aware, there is concern that the sitenotices regarding
submission of candidacy for the Board of Trustees election were not
seen anywhere but Meta after the 11th of this month. Because of the
potentially massive consequence of this, and to encourage a full and
active election, the election committee has determined that:
- Candidacies will be accepted through July 27th at 23:59 (UTC)
- The period for questioning candidates begins immediately.
Candidates that are "late to the party" will, no doubt, be scrutinized
by the community. The Committee hopes that the community will work to
actively ensure that all candidates receive equivalent questioning.
- The dates of election will not change. The election will begin on
28 July and end on 10 August.
Please know that we recognize the radical nature of altering the
schedule in the midst of the election and would not do it if we did
not absolutely believe that there was a possibility that others may be
interested and qualified and may not have known about the key dates.
For the committee,
Philippe
(in my capacity as a volunteer, and not as an employee of the
Wikimedia Foundation)