Dear Wikimedians,
The local information pages (including "about Taipei", and "local
transportation") have been completed on the official website of Wikimania
2007. Please take a look and I think many questions will be solved after you
read them.
http://wikimania2007.wikimedia.org/wiki/Local_information
Translation to other languages is welcome too.
Cheers,
Theodoranian
desean colaborar con nosotroa?
GRacias
MAS IDEAS
DISEÑO-IMPRESION-MERCADOTECNIA
MASIDEAS
DESIGN-PRINT SHOP-MARKETING
----- Original Message ----
From: JEREMIAS SENA PEREZ <coeefrosa(a)yahoo.es>
To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Thursday, June 7, 2007 7:54:26 AM
Subject: [Foundation-l] DESEO COLABORAR
FAVOR RESPONDER EN ESPAÑOL
---------------------------------
¡Descubre una nueva forma de obtener respuestas a tus preguntas!
Entra en Yahoo! Respuestas.
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
____________________________________________________________________________________
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
http://sims.yahoo.com/
Posting on behalf of Election Commttee,
--
KIZU Naoko
aphaia(a)gmail.com
* Vox populi, vox dei *
-----------------------
Dear all,
We, the election committee, hereby announce the opening of a new
election for members of the Wikimedia Foundation's Board of Trustees.
At least three positions will be filled from this election, with the
elected members serving a two year term.
It is important to note that election processes are slightly different
this year than in previous years: all candidates should be certain to
thoroughly read the FAQ at:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/en
>From today, June 10th, we're accepting candidates for the Board of Trustees. If
you're interested, you must make a candidate statement and list
yourself on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Candidates/en
We also need the help or translators for the elections, so if you're
fluent in any language other than English, and willing to help, please
list yourself here:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/Translations
If you have any questions, please first read the FAQ, then list your
questions to the talk page:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/FAQ/en
The official announcement is available on Meta:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/2007/en
We are confident that this election will draw very qualified
candidates, and we wish them the best of luck.
Regards,
Kizu Naoko (Aphaia)
Newyorkbrad
Philippe Beaudette
Jon Harald Søby
Wikimedia Board Election Steering Committee, 2007
Hi. The model that Wikisource follows here is similar to Wikiversity:
Just as at Wikiversity, the Wikisource "incubator" is within Wikisource itself. We consider this to be a much more supportive (and better monitored) environment for new languages (rather than the generic incubator.wikimedia.org) for a number of reasons. When such languages are ready, they can then recieve their own subdomains. Until then, they always have a proper place to build their content.
In fact, my personal suggestion is that new test languages for all existing Wikimedia projects (Wikipedia, Wikibooks, etc.) should be hosted by those projects themselves, rather than at a generic incubator. The Wikiversity/Wikisource model works very nicely indeed, providing a closer sense of a project-wide environment for new test-languages, with a common logo and framework for parallel new languages in the project, while the generic incubator is rather cold and unfriendly (take a look at its main page). There is no way that a single separate wiki for all new languages in all projects at once can provide proper guidance, supervision, and monitoring. Perhaps the incubator would be better left for testing entirely new Wikimedia projects.
As for the Wikisource portal, because it is at wikisource.org rather than on Meta, you will find that it is much better supported than the portals for other Wikimedia projects, which are often out-of-date ("out-of-site" >> "out-of-mind"), and often have aesthetic or other problems that take longer to fix. People go to Wikisource and make direct suggestions for Portal updates right there at the talk page, and Wikisource admins take care of things immediately because they are always around at the wiki. Here too, this may be a better model than the convention for other projects.
Dovi Jacobs
---------------------------------
Shape Yahoo! in your own image. Join our Network Research Panel today!
Hi,
I wonder: Is there an obligation to upload free images to Commons? You see,
I have a argued that by opening the Commons project, you, the Foundation,
asserted that all free images should be now uploaded to Commons, and *not*
to Wikipeida. Others have argued that there has been no official statement,
thus uploading free images that can and will be used in other projects can
still be uploaded to Wikipedia.
IMHO, "banning" (not technically, but via a rule) uploading of free image to
Wikipedia will encourge the use of Commons and of it's content.
Yoni
As the founder of wikiHow, which is the wiki which has already become carbon
neutral:
http://www.wikihow.com/wikiHow:Carbon-Neutral
I think I have a perspective on this issue which might be helpful to
Wikimedians:
When wikiHow went carbon neutral the majority of community members and
readers were positive about the move. For many it affirmed belief that
wikiHow was more than just your average website. That said, there were some
community members who opposed it for a variety of reasons including
skepticism of carbon offsetting, skepticism of global warming and a belief
that wikiHow should not be engaging in any forms of political statements.
Others thought it was no more of a political statement than saying "I
recycle" or "I clean up my garbage." It is this issue surrounding NPOV /
and desire not to make political statements which is probably the thorniest
issue here and something that the Wikimedia community would need to work out
before proceeding.
Food for thought: If Wikimedia went carbon neutral it would have influence
throughout the world that would go well beyond offsetting many tons of
carbon. The Wikimedia Foundation has earned a good deal of moral
authority. Other websites including wikiHow and many others look to the WMF
for leadership on many fronts. By setting this example, other websites big
and small would follow suit. Every person who has contributed to a WMF
project has helped spread ideas that have made the world a better place:
You have created and shared knowledge. You have educated others on the
concept of free culture. You have proven it is possible to assume good faith
and collaborate with total strangers. Now you have the chance to spread the
concept that reducing and cleaning up your own pollution is a responsible
way to run any corporation or non-profit organization. It is one more great
idea that Wikimedia could spread widely.
On the issue of cost, this is a challenging but solvable problem. If a
volunteer or group of volunteers did a separate fund raising campaign
contacting organizations and people sympathetic to this cause, I think it
could be successful. A pitch to the tune of "help the 10th largest website
in the world set an example for the rest of the internet" would probably
succeed at generating new donors that might not otherwise contribute to the
WMF. It would also be possible to target existing donors. For example,
over the past few years, wikiHow or me as an individual have contributed
close to $30,000 to the WMF. If someone sent me an email asking me /
wikiHow to chip in $1000 for this side fund raising plan, I'd say yes in a
heartbeat! I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Best,
--
Jack Herrick
Founder, wikiHow
http://www.wikiHow.com - Building the world's largest how-to manual
(This mail is only relevant to people who maintain a WMF mailman list)
Hi,
due to increasing spam rates to the mailing lists, is there a way of
cutting down on the spam we receive and/or the work needed in dealing
with it? Currently, there is a checkbox saying to "discard all
messages marked defer" (which is the default) - but I don't think this
actually prevents further postings from the same spammer (correct me
I'm wrong). Marking every message for the 'discard/block combo' takes
increasing amounts of time. What I'm wondering is if it's possible to,
say, "mark all messages as spam", which would do that job for us? Or
can one increase the threshold for potential spam (and is that what
David Gerard did recently on the wikiEN-l list)? Also, I invariably
get the same spam messages sent to my own inbox - is this preventable?
Cheers,
Cormac
First, I think there has been some misreading of the license terms.
Please trust me that CC does not support "moral rights," and that
these are
complex matters.
The clause in question merely says that the license does not seek to
invalidate or interfere with moral rights. The primary reason for
that, as
I understand it, is that there is some concern that a license which
attempts to do the impossible may thereby be ruled completely
invalid. Most older
versions of CC licenses simply ignored moral rights in a way which
might appear to be attempting to waive them. One exception was the
Canadian
localization, which attempted to waive them (perhaps successfully,
under Canadian law).
As a practical matter, the different ways to waive moral rights are
complicated and inconsistent across jurisdictions. Additionally, in
jurisdictions where
moral rights are strong (important), attempts to weaken them are
politically dangerous.
So the best approach seemed to be to keep CC licensing out of the
moral rights business altogether. These are copyright licenses.
They explicitly do
not (and cannot, in many important jurisdictions) touch on moral
rights issues.
In fact, nothing has changed between previous versions of CC licenses
and this one, in terms of the actual effect of the licenses. Before,
the licenses said
nothing at all about moral rights. Now, the licenses simply
explicitly acknowledge that they say nothing at all about moral rights.
I see no reason to get excited.
--Jimbo