Hi all,
As the Board have been rather slow with publicising the new privacy
policy, I have taken the step of adding a notice to the bottom of
[[MediaWiki:Copyrightstext]] on the English-language Wikipedia (the text
which is displayed when you click "Edit this page"), which mentions that
if you are editing anonymously, your IP address will be publically and
permanently associated with the edits, and if you're editing while
logged in, your IP address will be stored for around 2 weeks.
Someone has also added a link to the privacy policy on the bottom of
every page.
I urge admins on all the various projects to update their project with
this information - make it clear that editing will mean that some
personally-identifiable information is kept about the contributor.
Chris
Could someone, just for the benefit of this (relative) outsider and
journalist, explain what the basic objections are to AdSense type ads on
Wikipedia? I know you'll be speaking for yourself and not the community,
and will read the explanations accordingly.
Best, MP
Marshall Poe, Ph.D.
The Atlantic Monthly
600 New Hampshire Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20037
202-266-6511
mpoe(a)theatlantic.com
-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces(a)wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces@wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Dan Grey
Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 7:41 AM
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Benefits of advertising (was Our
exponentiallyincreasing costs)
On 27/10/05, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >The relatively small number of editors who will throw a hissy-fit off
> >won't be missed - new editors arrive all the time, and many
> >eventually crawl back after a public foot-stomping session anyway.
>
>
> A full one-third of that hard core sufficiently dedicated to Wikipedia
> to spend their own scarce cash going all the way to Wikimania 2005,
> wasn't it? Something about that doesn't sound "insignificant" to me.
> Maybe it does to you.
I think you're under-estimating the total number of editors WP has,
over-estimating who'd leave, and over-valuing their importance.
Where'd you get that figure from anyway?
Dan
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hi dear all,
So....
I would like to remind anyone that Wikimania is an
event organised primarily by the Wikimedia Foundation.
This year, Wikimania will occur in Boston, more
precisely we will be hosted by Harward University.
However, the event is still an event organised by the
Foundation, by a core team of wikipedians, and
primarily for the community. It engages our whole
organisation... and can improve or damage our image as
well.
In the light of the past Wikimania, I think the event
needs to be organised in a rather professional way.
Experience showed the last core organisation team that
while some issues needed to be discussed and fixed
very quickly, other issues did not need to be taking
care of before one or two months before the actual
event taking place.
Experience also showed it was extremely important that
certain responsabilities be clearly given to "named"
persons, rather than being loosely taking care of by
anyone feeling an interest at some point, that
organisational tools be used rather than wikis etc...
In short, any event involving rather big amounts of
money, external communication and so, had to be
organised in a *professional* way, rather than the
(great but not all fitting) wiki way.
For this reason, we are thinking (though it is not yet
a final decision), to have officially an Event
coordinator.
Other roles to be held in the organisation are
typically
* technical support
* sponsor/grant coordinator
* logistic assistant
* press coordinator and other outside communication
* internal communication (webmastering and translation
mostly)
* programm coordinator
All this, with a certain degree of control from the
Foundation. And a strict degree of control by the
Event coordinator. And the agreement of the core team
for all issues which involve the whole team.
The Foundation is currently discussing this
organisation, and it is my belief no major move should
be done until this is all agreed, with the board and
with the current core team.
Which mean things like :
* no sponsorship deal should be start up without a
grant/sponsor coordinator
* no logistic involving Harward university should be
discussed without having set who would be the event
coordinator and logistic assistant
* no major communication should be made without the
agreement of the whole team...
* and incidently, no logo derivative should be
published and distributed without the prior agreement
of ... the logo copyright holder (the Foundation).
We have time. Wikimania will happen next summer. Let's
do things step by step, even though the whole idea is
very exciting. As Danny says, tasks must not be
replicated, efforts not be wasted, spirits must stay
cool and we MUST appear coordinated in front of
partners.
Thanks
Anthere
--------
These are all very valid points. However, before we
have a meeting, it
would seem rather sensible for the board to decide who
the organizing
committee is. In that way, tasks will not be
replicated, and efforts
will not be wasted. Do we know who the coordinators
for this event are?
Danny
-----Original Message-----
From: SJ <2.718281828 at gmail.com>
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l at
wikimedia.org>;
Wikimedia Translators <translators-l at wikimedia.org>
Sent: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 08:11:38 -0400
Subject: [Foundation-l] Wikimania 2006 : general
meeting & getting
involved
Dear all,
Wikimania this past August was a joyous and wonderful
event. It was
remarkable above all for the geographic diversity of
its attendees.
Help make the next Wikimania just as wonderful, and
even more
international and multilingual. Please translate this
message and
pass it on to your respective mailing lists and wikis.
How to get involved :
1. Come to an IRC meeting next week. We will be
discussing conference
dates, among other things. Note what times you can
make it, or add to
the agenda, here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Planning#Meetings
2. Volunteer your time, language skills, and
enthusiasm:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Planning#Volunteering
3. Sign up for yet another mailing list
(wikimania-l). It is
currently low-traffic and primarily English-language;
two things you
can help change.
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l
4. Plan carpools or offer crash space for the event.
(harder to do
before the date is fixed, of course)
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2006:Venue#Attendees
Organizing Wikimania is at once demanding and
rewarding; and a chance
to learn about the inner workings of a large
conference. Please join
us on IRC, or on the wiki, to find out more.
++SJ
_______________________________________________
__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com
>My suggested wording is:
> All edits to Wikipedia are recorded and visible, with the [[IP
>address]] they are from. Your IP address is publicly visible on edits
>where you are not [[Special:Userlogin|logged in]]. See
>[[wikipedia:privacy policy|privacy policy]].
I've just realised that's ambiguous and partly incorrect. How about:
All edits to Wikipedia are publicly visible. Your [[IP address]]
is recorded, and it is publicly visible on edits where you are not
[[Special:Userlogin|logged in]]. See [[Wikimedia:Privacy policy]].
(BTW, the Wikimedia: interwiki prefix works on meta: but not on en:.)
Better? Easily translatable? An improvement on nothing at all?
- d.
In a press release today
(<http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/051020/ukth030.html?.v=1>), The
Wikimedia Foundation announced a new partnership with Answers.com.
A proposal was made by Answers Corporation to add a link in the
sidebar of the English Wikipedia to the Wikipedia:Tools page
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools>).
That page will highlight the "1-Click Answers, Wikipedia Edition"
software. Revenues from this toolbar will be split with the Wikimedia
Foundation. The Board have signed up to a 60-day trial of this
proposal.
I would like to welcome comments on this, both before the launch early
next year, and during the trial period. The talk page at
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Tools/1-Click_Answers>
should be used so that comments can be kept in one place.
Angela.
Tim Starling wrote:
>Neil Harris wrote:
>> Hmm. 2500 hits/sec * 86400 secs/day * $1 CPM = $216,000 / _day_, or
>> $78,000,000+/year. Have you considered that the Wikimedia foundation
>> board might be aware of this, and that its decision not to put up
>> advertising might be a principled decision, rather than motivated by
>> "fear of money"?
>We don't have 2500 hits/sec, we have 2500 requests/sec, i.e. including
>images, stylesheets, etc. The difference is roughly a factor of 3. The
>income would thus be closer to $26M.
>By these figures, we could cover our current operating costs by putting
>ads on the site for two weeks per year. I'm not sure if it's a good idea
>though.
I think recent discussion on en: re the Answers.com deal has
established that if we put ads on en: Wikipedia, a significant
proportion of contributors will feel sufficiently betrayed and ripped
off to get up and *leave*. Certainly enough to start a viable fork.
For no good reason of operating policy, and to the detriment of both
forks.
Whether this is foolish or not is debatable, but it is the case. I'm
not sure which sizable Wikipedia this *wouldn't* happen on. Gloriously
tempting buckets of money or no.
- d.
>The relatively small number of editors who will throw a hissy-fit off
>won't be missed - new editors arrive all the time, and many eventually
>crawl back after a public foot-stomping session anyway.
A full one-third of that hard core sufficiently dedicated to Wikipedia
to spend their own scarce cash going all the way to Wikimania 2005,
wasn't it? Something about that doesn't sound "insignificant" to me.
Maybe it does to you.
>I wonder how they'd pay for their fork...
A fork would be a disaster for both prongs of the fork, but that
doesn't mean it wouldn't be a certainty.
- d.
>As the Board have been rather slow with publicising the new privacy
>policy, I have taken the step of adding a notice to the bottom of
>[[MediaWiki:Copyrightstext]] on the English-language Wikipedia (the text
>which is displayed when you click "Edit this page"), which mentions that
>if you are editing anonymously, your IP address will be publically and
>permanently associated with the edits, and if you're editing while
>logged in, your IP address will be stored for around 2 weeks.
Firstly, I must apologise for being so terse and shitty on IRC last night.
Secondly, the message (which is [[MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning]]) got this edit:
00:16, 27 October 2005 A Man In Black (rv - Why is a warning like
this necessary? Why is it being added to a MediaWiki page without
discussion?)
I did say that seeking outside opinion would be a good idea ... or
waiting to hear back from the Board, if this is of Board-level
importance.
Your added text was (at the top, not the bottom):
By editing Wikipedia, your [[IP address]] (which is [[personally
identifiable information]]) is recorded. If you are not logged in,
your IP address will be publicly associated with your edits. If you
are logged in, your IP address will not be publicly displayed. Please
read our [[wikipedia:privacy policy|privacy policy]].
This is terrible in all sorts of ways.
(a) it's too long and too wordy.
(b) It will either scare or be utterly ignored by people who don't
care, and will cause noisy stupidity from those who think the sky is
falling if we block Tor because of vandals.
(c) You can't educate people about what IP addresses are in an
apparently important warning message. That's what links are for, not
warning messages. If they don't know an IP address is personally
identifiable information, this really isn't the place to tell them
inline.
(d) No-one reads a sentence over five words. No-one reads past the
second sentence. No-one reads a word over two syllables unless they
have to. (This one is really hard to keep to ...)
(e) Probably more.
(Your previous version was: "Warning: By submitting edits to
Wikipedia, your IP address, which is personally-identifiable
information, will be associated with your edit. If you are not logged
in, your IP address will be permanently and publically associated with
your edits. If you are logged in, your IP address will not be
publically displayed, however it will be kept for around 2 weeks.")
My suggested wording is:
All edits to Wikipedia are recorded and visible, with the [[IP
address]] they are from. Your IP address is publicly visible on edits
where you are not [[Special:Userlogin|logged in]]. See
[[wikipedia:privacy policy|privacy policy]].
Says all we need, promises nothing.
If this is important enough to add for Foundation reasons, it's
important enough to get right. For *hundreds* of projects, not just
en:.
- d.
Hi all.
The Wikimedia logos are up for deletion in Commons *yet again*. I
therefore started a page which is designed to give a once and for all
answer on this matter. The page is:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Alter_Wikimedia_Commons_policy_to…
Please keep all comments to the talk page:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:Alter_Wikimedia_Commons_poli…
Timeline for now is two weeks discussion, three weeks vote, if you
feel it should be longer, please change it. This is a decision that ,
in case of a "no we shouldn't" answer,will deeply affect all projects
and require new technical implementations. So please do pass this on
to your individual projects and translate the vote page on commons if
needed. Thank you.
Cheers,
Delphine
--
~notafish