--- Tim Starling <t.starling(a)physics.unimelb.edu.au> wrote:
> ...
> The only question in my mind is the domain: should this be under
> eb1911.wikipedia.org? We could make it visually distinct, to avoid
> confusion with Wikipedia itself. Or would eb1911.wikimedia.org be
> better? Or eb1911.wikisource.org?
It absolutely should *not* be on a Wikipedia subdomain. Wikisource is
the place for this.
-- mav
This is exactly right. An encyclopedia from 1911 is a primary source of
historical interest; it's data, not metadata. If it goes anywhere, it's
Wikisource.
--Marshall Poe
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hello
Although I have not been following this discussion, I was asked this evening
to grant 5 arbitrators on the English Wikipedia CheckUser powers.
While the request was made, I think it is sage for us to let it sit there
for some time to see if there are any valid protests to giving it to these
individuals. Usually, steward requests can remain for several days until someone
acts upon them, and I don't see why this should be any different.
I also wonder whether they should be given the power on a permanent or a
need-to-know basis. That is, should they always have this ability, or should
they only be given it when a case requires invesigation, and then have it
removed? Personally, I favor the latter option. I do not think anybody needs to be
able to do this in all instances.
I welcome comments.
Danny
Michael Snow wrote:
> At the time of the Arbitration Committee election, the number of
> ballots cast on the English Wikipedia was about the same as several
> cities with populations ranging roughly from 3,000-6,000 people. The
> upper end of this range is quite close to the number of people who
> edited five times or more last December, according to Erik Zachte's
> statistical reports. So it seems this may be the number that is
> closest to a real-world population for our community. Since those
> statistics have just been updated (thanks, Erik) we can see that the
> English Wikipedia is now nearly equivalent to a town of 15,000 people.
Or, as another way to look at it, consider a similar-sized university.
Considering the heavy turnover in population, and the way in which many
people tend to spend time focusing on particular intellectual interests
more than the wider community, this seems like an especially apt comparison.
With a "population" of 15,000, the English Wikipedia is thus comparable
to a medium-sized university. The Wikimedia projects overall are
probably the equivalent of one of the larger universities.
--Michael Snow
For those who don't know, the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica is a famous
public domain encyclopedia, advertised as the "sum of all human
knowledge" in 1911.
I recently (today) acquired a DVD containing scans of every page of the
1911 Britannica, along with index files for it all, organized by letter
and page number. I've already talked with avar, TimStarling, and brion
on IRC, and TimStarling specifically asked me to tell you all that he is
"confident that the server requirements will be minimal." They would set
up a domain name, generate some web pages automatically using the index
files, and host the entire set of 29,700 files totaling about 4 GB.
One more thing, these are black and white TIFs, and there is discussion
about whether they should be mass converted to PNGs to be easily viewable.
brian0918(a)gmail.com
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,69511,00.html?tw=rss.POL
In an Oct. 21 ruling, Florida circuit court Judge Karen Cole threw out a
defamation case against two TV stations because she deemed the plaintiff --
a Jacksonville woman -- to be a public figure who had been subject to
"substantial" internet debate.
Based on results of the recent elections in the US, I thought I would
try some comparisons with our own elections, to get a better idea of the
effective size of the Wikimedia electorate. What I did was to take the
elections results for cities in my general area, since I can find those
very quickly. I chose those cities where the number of ballots cast in a
contested local race (usually for city council) was closest to the
number of ballots cast in two of our elections (the Board of Trustees
election earlier this year, and the Arbitration Committee election last
December on the English Wikipedia). I figured that the population of
these cities would be a reasonable estimate of the effective size of our
community. Naturally, this is an impressionistic rather than a rigorous
statistical analysis.
At the time of the Arbitration Committee election, the number of ballots
cast on the English Wikipedia was about the same as several cities with
populations ranging roughly from 3,000-6,000 people. The upper end of
this range is quite close to the number of people who edited five times
or more last December, according to Erik Zachte's statistical reports.
So it seems this may be the number that is closest to a real-world
population for our community. Since those statistics have just been
updated (thanks, Erik) we can see that the English Wikipedia is now
nearly equivalent to a town of 15,000 people.
The turnout for the Board of Trustees election was comparable to a
real-world population of about 7,000-11,000 people.
It's a little harder to find an equivalent number in our ongoing
statistics, in part because project-wide participation is difficult to
capture (<cough>single login</cough>). Even the number of users with
five or more edits that month on just the Wikipedias collectively was
significantly larger than this.
--Michael Snow
> A few notes on this: firstly it seems that the guy who made the scans has no
> intention of claiming any rights to them. He seems to be interested in
Could just a scanner claim any rights, in any case? It is not an
"intellectual" act as far as I know.
Would this work consider more linked to Wikipedia or WIkisource?
Are the page in image format ore have they been OCRed?
- AnyFile -
foundation-l-request(a)wikimedia.org wrote:
> Why are you mentioning that? That is a strawman due to the fact
> that I strongly support the scalable approach.
>
> -- mav
Because your argument reduces the scalability.
Perhaps this entire thread could have been presented differently.
Board members? Would it be possible for you to discuss the Wikinews
press credentialing process at some point? Currently we use the system
in the same way high school and other non-professional journalism
organizations do all over the world, but perhaps we should have
something more than a tacit approval. One idea would be approval of a
phrase such as:
''Wikinews editions may accredit persons according to their policies
for the purpose of acting as freelance journalists when reporting on
news events for Wikinews."
Would this answer your concerns, Mav? It clearly states the
contributors are not representing Wikinews or the Wikimedia
Foundation, limits when and how the credentials may be used, but
allows the project to develop credentialing policies.
Amgine
Anthony wrote:
> I think we're probably all in agreement that the processed images
should go in the Commons. >.And the processed text should go into
Wikisource. In the mean time, well, I don't think it >.really matters
that much.
Maybe all processed images should go on Commons, but isn't it the case
that *some* processed images would serve the purposes of WikiSource, and
therefore go on Wikisource as well? Imagine, for example, that you had
a good image of the original draft of the Magna Carta, or the
Declaration of Independence. Wouldn't WikiSource benefit from the
inclusion of such a source?
--Marshall Poe
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Hi,
FYI
Yann
Subject: [WSIS Edu] WSIS Parallel Event on Open Educational Resources - 14
November 2005
Date: Wednesday 9 November 2005 02:37
From: Brendan Barrett <barrett @ hq . unu . edu>
To: Edu Mailinglist <edu @ wsis - cs . org>
World Summit on the Information Society
Tunis, Tunisia, 16-18 November 2005
Parallel Event on Widening Access to Knowledge through Open Sharing:
The Growing OpenCourseWare Movement
14 November 2005
Monday, 14 November 2005, 15.00-19.00
Saint Augustin Conference Room, Kram Expo Centre
Background
The term Open Educational Resources (OER) was first coined and
adopted at UNESCO’s 2002 Forum on the Impact of OpenCourseWare for
Higher Education in Developing Countries. OER champions the sharing
of knowledge worldwide to increase human intellectual capacity and
can best be understood as the open sharing of educational content,
enabled by tools (such as the World Wide Web) and defined by
standards (such as Creative Commons), for use and adaptation by the
global community of educators and learners.
OpenCourseWare (OCW), a critical component of the OER movement, is
defined as a free, publicly accessible, and openly licensed digital
resource that offers high quality learning materials structured
around courses and presented in a reasonably consistent format. An
OCW is a publication of course materials created by faculty to
support teaching and learning. For any given course, the published
materials should fully convey the parameters of the course’s subject
matter and ideally represent a substantially complete set of all the
materials used in the course.
For many educators and learners in the developing world, up-to-date
material in science and technology is in particularly short supply.
The value in openly sharing quality OCW resources is that they foster
the process of educational change, as societies seek to bring their
educational institutions into the Knowledge Age. The use of external
resources for educational improvement is not a new idea — colleges
and universities all over the world are accustomed to using
publications from many sources, facilitating exchanges involving
students and faculty, and seeking information via the Internet. The
OCW Movement, however, takes the principle of sharing and cross-
institutional exchange to the next level, enabling open access to a
vast library of high-quality educational materials in key curricular
areas from a wide array of institutions all over the world.
Outcomes
The intended outcomes for the event are that participating
institutions and organizations:
· Develop a common understanding of OCW and the broader OER
movement;
· Enhance their awareness of the growing international body of
OCW resources; and
· Find effective ways to adapt and use OCW materials for
teaching and learning, and ultimately raise the general standard of
global higher education.
In addition, an intended outcome for the event is to emphasize the
importance of open sharing of educational materials as a critical
component of the Plan of Action.
World Summit on the Information Society
Tunis, Tunisia, 16-18 November 2005
Parallel Event on Widening Access to Knowledge through Open Sharing:
The Growing OpenCourseWare Movement
14 November 2005
Monday, 14 November 2005, 15.00-19.00
Saint Augustin Conference Room, Kram Expo Centre
Draft Agenda
15.00- 15.30 Keynote address
Speaker: Dr. G. M. (Mike) Reed, Director of the United
Nations University
International Institute for Software Technology (UNU-IIST)
15.30- 16.40 Setting the Context: The World of Open
Educational Resources
Moderator: Marshall Smith, Education Program Director,
William and Flora
Hewlett Foundation
Panelists
o Derek Keats, Executive Director of Information and
Communication Services, University of the Western Cape
o Paula Le Dieu, Director of Creative Commons International
o Karen Lynch, Communications Director, Development Gateway
Foundation
16.40- 17.50 The Growing International OpenCourseWare
Movement
Moderator: Shigeru Miyagawa, Professor and Faculty Advisor, MIT
OCW
Panelists
o Yoshimi Fukuhara, Professer, Keio University
o Divina Frau Meigs, Professer, Université Paris 3-Sorbonne
o Mary Lee, Associate Provost, Tufts University, and Dean for
Educational Affairs, Tufts University School of Medicine
17.50- 18.45 Benefits and Challenges to Using and Adapting
OpenCourseWare Materials
Moderator: Brendan Barrett, Academic Programme Officer, UNU
Panelists
o Kuzvinetsa Peter Dzvimbo, Rector, African Virtual University
o Elizabeth Longworth, Director of the Information Society
Division, UNESCO
o Chunyan Wang, Professor at Renmin University of China School
of Law, and the China and Project Representative for Creative Commons
--
http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur la non-violence
http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclopédie libre
http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et services Linux