Wikimedia-l December 2007

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

163 participants
159 discussions

[Foundation-l] Racism in Commons
by Tony Wills 07 Dec '07

07 Dec '07

First, sorry if my points have already been made and/or answered I have tried to read all the fore-going discussion but may have missed things. 1) The main POV pushing here is to call all these cartoons racist. It would seem clear that the Ariel cartoons are on the face of it against Ariel Sharon and his policies/actions. To see Ariel Sharon as being used as a proxy for the Israeli nation, or Jews is an interpretation that requires input from the viewers POV. 2) Not yet used in any wikimedia project is not the same as "not useful for any Wikimedia project". I expect that at any one time the majority of images on commons may not be in use, that does not mean they are outside the project scope! 3) Keeping only a sampling of images as an 'exemplar' is not appropriate either, commons does not have a quota of any type of images, either they are within the project scope or not, we have no need to restrict supply, the projects can pick and choose what they want to use. 4) The 'original research' question doesn't seem relevant, that normally applies to research by the contributor themselves anyway. You might as well define all original photos on commons as original research. I would have thought the main problem with a lot of Bush and Sharon cartoons would be a question of defamation. But then if you take the POV that they are actually about a whole nation or its peoples, then perhaps you can not argue that one ;-). I would like to see the cartoons with useful descriptions putting them in context, when were they produced, in response to what news, actions etc. Looking at political cartoons in isolation makes no sense. Does everyone here actually understand the idea of a media bank?, commons is not just a convenient place to store images currently in use on other projects. Also commons gallery pages are not articles to provide information on the subject, but, along with the category system, they are a way to find the images to illustrate some aspect of the subject on other projects. I think the problem here is that some people think a gallery on commons should be a place to promote the subject depicted (with air brushed, promotional, photos), rather than part of a filing system . - Tony.

3 2

Re: [Foundation-l] Simple solution to the GFDL/CC-by-SA issue
by Lilewyn 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

Silly question time. Just because a project, say, decides to migrate from one license type to another, how can the project forcefully reassign the older contributions under the new license? I'm familiar with the GFDL and CC-BY-SA, but suppose someone (who is a stick-in-the-mud true believer of the GFDL, for instance?) insists that their contributions are only licensed under the GFDL and not a similar but less restrictive CC license? What about all the contributors (aka copyright holders for Wikipedia's content) who either disagree with such a move, or those who simply never give consent to the changeover? I'm hoping I'm missing something. ~ Kylu >> As far as I can understand, the main problem we have with the GFDL is that >> you have to include the entire text of the license if you want to use >> something that is GFDL. Why not, in the next GFDL version, just remove the >> clause that says you have to include the entire license, and just say it's >> sufficient to state that the material is GFDL and credit the author(s) in >> the appropriate manner? Wouldn't that - for the everyday person - accomplish >> exactly the same as switching to CC-by-SA? >A bit of a follow-up to this question: If the FSF modifies the GFDL to >be compatible with CC-BY-SA, wouldn't that negate the need to migrate >from one to the other? If the two licenses were fully-compatible to >the point that migration was possible, wouldn't we already be getting >everything we want out of the GFDL anyway? If the GFDL is modified to >suit our needs as well as the CC-BY-SA does, why is there a need to >migrate? Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com

4 3

[Foundation-l] sizes and figures ... brions pageviews ...
by THURNER rupert 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

hi, anybody knows how much bandwith wikimedia is using currently? thanks to tim i just saw the post from brion at http://leuksman.com/log/2007/06/07/wikimedia-page-views/ with the 7 billion / month pageviews for all wikimedia projects. does this mean * we have > 300 mio page views per day * we have 300 mio * 100k = 30 gb per day data volume * and then there is some traffic from kennisnet ? what would be our "average page size" and what would be the percentage handled by proxies, and kennisnet especially? rupert.

3 2

Re: [Foundation-l] Racism in Commons
by Durova 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

I was being unduly sharp-tongued and it was unfair of me. I can't imagine what it must be like to be in your position. Sorry for any offense. -- Oldak Quill (oldakquill(a)gmail.com) ****** Thank you, no offense taken. I was unduly sharp-tongued myself last month and paid a heavy price for it. In light of that, I owe a few dollops of good faith toward other people. Best regards, Durova

2 1

[Foundation-l] Meeting this week end
by Florence Devouard 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

Dear community, Some of you will remember that a meeting was originally planned in Frankfurt this week end, with representants from WMF and all wikimedia chapters, to work on organizational issues (such as "who can make business with who", "who can do fundraising", "how to redistribute money between organizations" etc...). This meeting was cancelled because we felt not enough prepared for it to have much chance to be successful, and suggested another course of events. The chapters were asked to participate to a survey. The survey management was led by the chapcoordinator, Delphine. This survey is pretty long and detailed, with topics such as * History of the chapter. Basic details (figures, date of creation...) * Current status of the chapter (membership based organization, non profit, languages covered...) * Activities of the chapter (promotion, press, grant development, software etc...) * Perception of Wikimedia Foundation activities (does it get involved in...) * Public recognition of the chapter (by press, government etc...) * Relationships with the Foundation and other chapters (status, suggestions for improvement) * strenghts and weaknesses of the Foundation and of the chapter * what should be the measures of success of a chapter * What does the chapter intend to focus on in the future * etc... A meeting will occur in Frankfurt this week end, and part of saturday will be dedicated to discuss Wikimedia Foundation and chapters issues. Participants will include WMF board members (Frieda, Jan-Bart and myself) and WMF staff members (Sue, Delphine). The day will include * Presentation of survey results & analysis * Discussion of survey results & analysis * Defining process & timeline for developing proposal and gaining approval for it I am very excited at the prospective of reading the chapter survey results and analyzing it. I hope it will be useful in the discussions. Thank you to all who took the time to complete it. Ant

1 0

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikinews - not so much a state of the wiki
by Mike Godwin 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

>> I'm not sure what you mean by "rhetoric" here > > Rhetoric is something said more for effect than for its informational > value - humour and irony are forms of rhetoric. (They can still have > informational value, but it's generally of secondary importance to the > effect of the statement.) Ah, that explains my confusion -- you were using a nonstandard definition of "rhetoric." In any case, what I originally posted was meant to be understood primarily for its informational value and not merely appreciated for my inimitable style and flare. > It also helps to English - we're generally > much more used to sarcasm and similar forms of rhetoric than, say, > Americans. In light of this exchange, you're being ironic here, right? :) --Mike

4 4

[Foundation-l] Forthcoming book about Wikipedia, "How Wikipedia Works" -- feedback wanted
by phoebe ayers 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

All, I'm pleased to announce that four Wikipedians -- myself (user:phoebe), Charles Matthews (user:Charles Matthews), Ben Yates (user:Tlogmer) and SJ Klein (user:sj) -- are writing a book about using and understanding Wikipedia, tentatively titled "How Wikipedia Works". It will be published by [[No Starch Press]] in early 2008. This guide will be focused on helping readers understand Wikipedia and helping new editors contribute. We hope to include enough detail to make it a useful reference for current contributors as well. (Note that this is a different project from the O'Reilly book that was discussed earlier on the lists). We welcome community feedback and ideas, and hope to make this a truly community-based work. There is a project page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Phoebe/book We'll add detail there over the coming weeks, and have asked for feedback in some specific areas. Please do contribute and send us your thoughts and ideas. Some details: * The book will be licensed under the GFDL and an online version will be available. (No Starch has been a great partner in this and has been very supportive of open licensing). Where the book reprints on-wiki documentation, the authors of that documentation will be credited. * We're primarily focusing on the English Wikipedia, but there will be brief sections about the sister projects and Wikipedias in other languages, so we definitely welcome feedback and ideas from those communities as well. * A portion of the authors' proceeds will be donated to the Wikimedia Foundation. If you have any questions, concerns or ideas, please let me or one of the other authors know. I'll be updating the project page with progress information as we get closer to publication. best, Phoebe Ayers phoebe.ayers(a)gmail.com

3 2

Re: [Foundation-l] Wikinews - not so much a state of the wiki
by Mike Godwin 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

Thomas Dalton writes: > Yes, but the reason I'm good at understanding sarcasm is because I'm > frequently exposed to it due to it's common place in my culture. The > reason Americans are good are understanding sports metaphors is > because they are frequently exposed to them due to their common place > in their culture. I am utterly charmed by the notion that, as an American, I'm more likely to understand sports metaphors than sarcasm. --Mike

3 2

Re: [Foundation-l] Racism in Commons
by Durova 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

Isn't this going slightly off-topic? Trying to stand on Essjay's shoulders while you're both drowning isn't going to save anyone. For what it's worth, I don't see how Essjay's actions were wrong - since we don't require any credentials to edit, it matters not whether he lied about having credentials that he didn't. He just played a game in trying to assume credibility he didn't have, at least he didn't harm anyone. -- Oldak Quill (oldakquill(a)gmail.com) ****** Excuse me for any impropriety. I meant only that both he and I were reported in the news. It isn't easy to be in this position. -Durova

2 1

Re: [Foundation-l] Racism in Commons
by Durova 06 Dec '07

06 Dec '07

> Why bother? Good old William of Occam would have made a fantastic > Wikimedian. You've got a simple, quick, and easy solution to a pretty bad > problem. Why hesitate and go in for something more complicated? Don't > understand the reason to overcomplicate. Or, alternatively, you could ban > him from uploading any more politics-related images... > > Honestly, though, if we get to the stage where 50 percent of one guy's > picture gallery labels him as a Neo-Nazi - complete fringe theory - Commons > need to learn something from enwiki and toughen up. There's a word for that > we use at enwiki: POV-pushing. This is not acceptable and we don't really > need any more bad press at the moment, not with Durova/!! all over the > Register. En.wikipedia has a lot more problems and disgruntled users than Commons ever has, and I don't believe it is purely due to size or reputation. We're more easy-going at Commons and we try to talk to and help people before clicking the block button and pissing them off - you'd be surprised how many times I've explained one point of policy to someone who would otherwise have been blocked for uploading copyvios or such after repeated warnings, and they realised a point they hadn't understood before and became decent contributors. Policy and copyright are hard to understand and blocking is not the way to educate people. en.wp does not do things perfectly; and no, they aren't the perfect older sibling for the little ones to look up to. En.wp is more like the rebellious older sibling who became a rock star and wildly famous, but is also slowly killing itself with drugs and alcohol. Just because it makes a lot of money and has a lot of fans doesn't mean the little siblings should mimic its behaviour. --Ayelie (Editor at Large) ****** Could I ask for a retraction, please? I've been keeping my head low for two weeks in the hopes that things would blow over. Yes, I'm in the Register now. And unfortunately in a couple of more mainstream news sources also. None of them contacted me for comment before running the story. And due to the way dispute resolution progressed I had no fair opportunity to present my side of events onsite, either. I unblocked the editor as soon as I realized I was mistaken, apologized repeatedly, sought to make amends, invited scrutiny, and pledged improvements. What more can I do? I'm not Essjay. I haven't lied about my credentials or misled any reporters. I've volunteered for Wikipedia for two years and 20,000 edits and handled some of the site's most difficult disputes. Please assume good faith. This reads like an implication that I've sought this attention, and that I'm a substance abuser. None of that is true. -Durova

5 5

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Wikimedia-l December 2007