>
> Anthony DiPierro wrote:
>
> >On 3/17/06, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>What really brought my attention to this matter is an image recently
> >>proposed as a featured image on enwiki:
> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sunbathe_Buttocks.jpg ... Now it
> >>may be that the image was created with the consent of the subjects, I
> >>don't intend to criticize this particular image... But really, lets
> >>consider such an image with identifiable subjects who didn't know the
> >>image had been taken. What if she were to return to her dorm room and
> >>find the Wikipedia article on sunbathing stapled to it? Were the
> >>image taken without her consent it's quite possible that she'd be
> >>pissed, and I believe that she'd be justified. There is no reason that
> >>illustrations like this in Wikipedia can't be ones which are created
> >>with the subjects consent. So even ignoring any possible legal issues
> >>with such images, I think we're breaking good ethics to use images
> >>like this without the subjects consent.
> >>
> >>
> >In a case like the one you give, I agree. Wikipedia should respect
> >people's right to privacy (which applies in cases where the identity
> >of the person is not important for any educational/newsworthy
> >purpose).
> >
> What is unclear about the picture is whether the subject is
> identifiable. She has a towel (or something) over her head which would
> hide her identity.
>
> Ec
I would just like to point out that the lady to the left is flipping the
bird at the camera-man. Might not be too happy to have her photo on
Wikipedia I think.
TBSDY
Hi all, as the title suggests, I'm writing about etiquette.
Specifically, whether it's ok to delete valid questions or comments
from a talk page (in the particular case I'm talking about, deleting a
question from their own user talk page).
Personally, I think this is highly uncivil. "Sorry, I am just going to
ignore you, no, in fact, I am going to pretend you never asked the
question in the first place" (without even the "courtesy" of saying
this). However, there is scant mention of this in policy or guideline
pages (admittedly, I've only looked at English Wikipedia and
Wikibooks). Why?
Is it not considered rude to ignore someone? Is refusing to answer
questions not an ominous sign in a collaborative environment? (Ok,
when someone has just asked their umpteenth ignorant question, it
might be understandable, but this was my first contact with the
person.)
For what it's worth, the only mention I found was on either project's
policy pages was on [[w:en:Wikipedia:Etiquette]], which says "don't
ignore questions". Etiquette isn't even a policy or guideline on
Wikibooks - I'm addressing that at the moment.
So, has anyone else had a similar thought or frustration? And while
I'm asking about this, I'll also ask: what's the difference between
Etiquette and Civility? As far as I can define it (in Wikimedia
terms), etiquette is about specific instances of niceness or rudeness,
whereas civility is about a whole attitude, comprised of etiquette, no
personal attacks etc. Or what do you think?
Cormac
Muijz refuses to talk with 3 negotiators between me and him who had
proposed to help solve the differences. Muijz refused to co-operate. I
want to co-operate. Ugly thing is Muijz refused. But the negotiators
punish me by hunting me on nl.wikipedia. The world turned around. Muijz
refuses, I co-operate, I get punished for it. I would desperately like
to see an arbcom on nl:
Waerth/Walter
(I am copying this to wikien-l, since the 1-Click-Tool is relevant
specifically to the English Wikipedia. However, this is a Foundation
issue.)
Apparently Answers.com has filed a lawsuit against Babylon, a
competitor creating an innovative (if proprietary) software product --
see atttached message. Answers.com claims Babylon violates one of its
patents.
The Wikimedia Foundation has business relations with Answers.com.
Answers.com, which mirrors Wikipedia content, has provided funding to
Wikimania and Wikimedia, and there was an announcement last year for a
new partnership about a Wikipedia-branded version of Answers.com's
"One-Click-Answers":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools/1-Click_Answers
This announced partnership, while initially controversial, as of the
last message from Jimmy Wales is scheduled to go ahead:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2006-February/006055.html
Certainly, it is not practical to only engage in business partnerships
with companies whose behavior in its entirety our community in its
entirety considers ethical. We are partnering with Yahoo!, in spite of
their cooperation with the Chinese regime, for example. However, the
proposed 1-Click-Answers partnership would go further than that, since
the patents covering this exact tool are apparently at the heart of
this lawsuit. From the article excerpted below:
The technology is used in one of Answers' core software products,
1-Click Answers, which can be downloaded for free from its Web site,
said Jay Bailey, Answers' marketing director.
Babylon makes a one click answer tool, which as of recently integrates
Wikipedia content. I am a former Babylon user; their software made
huge waves when it first was released for Windows many years ago due
to it being fairly clever at identifying words on the screen even in
images (you then see translations, definitions, etc.). The Answers.com
patent in question was only granted in 2004 according to the article,
and Babylon claims they got a similar patent in 2001 already. It seems
very much like a predatory bad faith lawsuit to me, and an abuse of
exactly the kind of patents that software patent critics oppose, but
that is my personal judgment. In general, it is considered good form
in the IT industry these days to use software patents only
defensively.
>From the information I have seen so far, it seems to be entirely
within the realm of possibilities that Answers.com would also sue an
open source project which is allegedly in violation of its patents. I
have known about these patents for some time, so I have asked Jimmy
months ago to ask Bob Rosenschein of Answers.com for an affirmation
that they would use patents only defensively; Jimmy promised to ask,
but I have not heard from him since then.
Now, our own philosophy on these matters is clear. Wikimedia is
entirely running on free software and does not even allow the use of
patent-encumbered file formats like MP3. It does not therefore seem
proper to me to engage in a partnership with regard to the
1-Click-Answers tool. It would be like becoming friends with someone
while you watch them point a gun at someone else; the next bullet
might be for you. I don't have a strong opinion on the other
partnerships with Answers.com, but I think this specific one should be
cancelled ASAP.
This is especially true as the details of the deal -- how we highlight
the existence of this tool -- were highly controversial to begin with.
I have also seen no actual revenue projections which would indicate
this is a compelling idea, and I doubt such projections can be made
with any accuracy.
I would be interested in what others think, and in any missing pieces
of information. Failing this, I strongly suggest that the issue is put
before a Board vote if it is still relevant, given this fundamentally
new situation.
Erik
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mathias Schindler <mathias.schindler(a)gmail.com>
Date: Mar 22, 2006 10:08 AM
Subject: [WikiEN-l] [Slightly OT] Answers sues Babylon
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)wikipedia.org>
(...)
http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/news.cms?id=13132Answers.com owner sues Israeli tech firm
by Amanda Fung
Answers Corp., the Manhattan-based creator of Answers.com, said
Wednesday that it sued an Israeli company to stop it from using
technology that links a user's computer with a central database over
the Internet.
The lawsuit, filed with the Tel-Aviv District Court, claims that
Babylon Ltd. infringed on Answers' Computerized Dictionary and
Thesaurus Applications patent. Answers got the patent in 2004, nine
years after it first applied.
http://www.tradingmarkets.com/tm.site/news/BREAKING%20NEWS/190036/http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060308/ukw014.html?.v=45
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Right now it is possible for someone to criticize Wikipedia for
mistakes and vandalism in ancient versions... perhaps mistakes they
inserted themselves which were reverted later. Although I think it is
important that our readers understand the nature of Wiki and that such
things can happen, the ability for external sites to deep link our old
revisions at will when combined with our relaxed presentation of old
content makes it quite easy to misrepresent the situation and creates
a greater risk that users will be directed to stale and incorrect
content which we've since corrected.
I'd like to know what people think of the following proposal.
When a non-logged in user visits an old Wikipedia revision via a link
from a third party website, we first display a notice that on enwiki
might say something like:
'''Please note:''' You have requested an old version of the article
{{{PAGENAME}}} from {{{rev timestamp}}}. A more current version of the
article is [[{{cur}}|available here]]. You may also [[{{{diff
page}}|view the differences]] between the version you requested and
the current version, or [[{{{hist page}}}|view the entire history]] of
this article. The old revision is available [[{{{old
revision}}}|here]].
We could decide to display this notice either to people who followed a
link from another site only, or those users plus ones who directly
typed in or followed a bookmark to the old revision. Since logged in
users are far more likely to understand Wikipedia, we could probably
skip the notice for them.
Thoughts?
Hi, dear all,
I gladly inform you all that the first book intoduces Wikipedia in Chinese
language is published in Taiwan today. The author, Kaurjmeb(KJ), is one of
the administrators from zh.wikipedia. The title of this book is
「維基百科攻略：知識分享最前線」(Literally means, "Walkthrough of Wikipedia, the very first
line sharing knowledge"). KJ teaches the readers how to participate in
editing Wikipedia step by step in this book. This book is published by
PCuSER publishing company. You can get the information from
http://www.books.com.tw/exep/prod/booksfile.php?item=0010326363 (an online
bookstore website based in Taiwan). HAPPY HAPPY! ^_____^
Theodoranian
>
> Congratulations!
>
> (What's her edit count?)
>
> --
> Ausir
> Wikipedia, wolna encyklopedia
> http://pl.wikipedia.org
Zero :-) she barely knows about Wikipedia except what I have told her!
Actually, I think she thinks it's a little wierd I spend so much time on the
site.
I did once add a new number to Wikipedia that she made up in a fit of
silliness: [[Quadribblas]]. This, needless to say, is now deleted.
TBSDY
Hello, I'm proposing a new project called WikiTimeline
that focuses on simple timelines of key events. This
is due to the fact that most wiki pages do indeed list
some dates and years in regard to important
developements when relevant, but often in a very
disorganized or hard to decipher fashion. Visit the
proposal page here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiTimeline
I'm not very experienced with Wikimedia but at least a
bit of light can be shed on this issue via this
proposal so that a discussion can determine how
feasible or necessary such a project is. Thank you,
Jesse
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Congratulations to Ta bu shi da yu! (Is it a Japanese name?)
First time to post in [Foundation-l]. :)
H.T.
-----Original Message-----
From: foundation-l-bounces(a)wikimedia.org
[mailto:foundation-l-bounces@wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of ! Chris Sherlock
Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 12:40 PM
To: foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
Subject: [Foundation-l] Ta bu shi da yu is getting married
Just a short note to let people know that on Saturday 18th March, 2006
Wikipedia administrator Ta bu shi da yu asked his girlfriend to marry him,
and she said yes!
To clarify (I've been pinged on this before) - obviously he did not ask her
in his capacity as a Wikipedia admin :-)
Chris
TBSDY
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
___________________________________________________ 最新版 Yahoo!奇摩即時通訊 7.0，免費網路電話任你打！ http://messenger.yahoo.com.tw/
Just a short note to let people know that on Saturday 18th March, 2006
Wikipedia administrator Ta bu shi da yu asked his girlfriend to marry
him, and she said yes!
To clarify (I've been pinged on this before) - obviously he did not
ask her in his capacity as a Wikipedia admin :-)
Chris
TBSDY
