I don't see the difference between a voter drive on en.wp, and the
other projects having direct action drives on them stating "GO VOTE!"
and having similar campaigns.
Why is this actually an issue? The email apparently does not say
"Vote for XYZ and not ABC". It just says go vote.
Why do you feel this is A) noteworthy, and B) anything we should be
On Jul 3, 2007, at 9:59 AM, foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> i wonder what IS going on behind this *spamming*: who? why? does
> anyone have
> a clue?
I've prepared a detailed summary of the board elections and candidates
at < http://pathos.ca/blog/pathoschild/61 >, based on the collected
platforms, comments, user subpages, articles, and so forth for each
candidate. The wiki equivalent is at <
corrections will be mirrored.
It took far longer to read through all the information than I had
planned for. I hope it will be useful for those with more important
uses for their free time. ;)
Jesse Martin (Pathoschild)
On 7/3/07, Casey Brown <cbrown1023(a)comcast.net> wrote:
> It is unnecessary and not a very good idea. If he does this on every other
> wiki, I will not complain. (But I doubt he will do that.)
I already started on commons yesterday. It should be done today.
I have produced a list of eligible voters on German, and sent it to
Kurt. ... However, I don't personally have the German writing skills
to write an inspirational email in German, nor can I reply to the
questions which would result. I think that it is also somewhat less
important because there has already been an effort there to increase
participation on that project, and German's relative turn out is
already ~4x better than English's.
I can't make lists for the other projects because I do not have access
to copies of their databases. I did try, however. It would take me
longer than the election has remaining to complete such lists via the
I understand that the Election com know how many eligible users there
are on each project (or at least
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board_elections/jump would indicate
such), so perhaps they can easily provide the information.
As most of you should be aware I am currently a member of the Ombudsman
Commission (see http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_commission)
One of my current complaints involves a user who disputes the results of a
CU, as I do not have checkuser access on enwiki how would I go about
verifying the results?
Nathan Carter (Cartman02au)
Florence Devouard wrote:
> Let me provide a very short set of comments regarding the trademarks
> registration strategy.
> I got estimates for larger protection, but considered the overall price
> to be unreasonable *right now*. Total amount if no trouble was 100 000
> euros (130 000 dollars ?).
How long such a trademark will last? That is is it 100k eur for a
year, for 5 years or for what time?
> As a side note, because it was recently mentionned. Only text was
> registered (project names), not logo. So, it is not an issue to change
> any logo right now, either in a major fashion or to fix minor errors. I
> would even suggest it is a good idea to do it NOW :-)
To do now what? To fix minor errors or to register logo?
just a thought that spontaneously came to me this morning which i would like
(i know logs are not to be published but i am just quoting myself from
[09:50]<oscar>please allow me to prompt an open question: would it not be
interesting to read the answers to an imaginary questionnaire about the
final motivation of the voters (answers as to the "why" they voted
such-and-so) [[Elections 2007/Questions to voters]] if it existed?[09:51]<
oscar>like a commentary line as we have in edits, but anonymized[09:52]<
oscar>alphabetically ordered in one big dump :-)
[09:59]<oscar>it was just a thought, like last year i suggested a debate
[09:59]<oscar>which now did take place more or less[10:00]<oscar>who knows
what happens next year?[10:02]<oscar>there could be several reasons for
doing this however, hints for the wmf or the board, for online elections in
general and perhaps reading each other's comments is useful as well?[10:03]<
oscar>afterwards of course[10:03]<oscar>not *during* an election
(end of quote)
curious about your opinions!
*edito ergo sum*
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the
Wikimedia Foundation nor of its Board of Trustees.
An Indonesian telco company contacted some of us, Indonesian Wikipedia
sysops, a couple of weeks ago. They are interested in providing their
users with Indonesian Wikipedia contents by SMS. I would like to ask
# Since Wikipedia content is GFDL, how can they comply to the license?
# The name "Wikipedia" itself is a trademark. Can they put the name on
their advertising? How?
Have anything similiar to this situation happened? Please share or
give us direction on how we should handle this, since we think the
idea is good to make Wikipedia more known to Indonesian.
Ivan Lanin [[meta:User:IvanLanin]]
''I hope someday you'll write with us, and the world will edit as one.''
geni wrote on Sun, 1 Jul 2007 23:10:56 +0100
> An issue on commons and various non english wikis.
> First it is only legal to translate the GFDL if you add:
> "This is an unofficial translation of the GNU General Public License
You can find some unofficial translation (actually not many) at
It seems reasonable to use the translation present there, if
available, or to coordinate a translation on that site.
I am writing to ask all of you to think carefully when you vote.
The board election is very important and many good people are running.
But it is better for Wikipedia's future to keep a bad person off than
to have the best people on.
There are three seats open. When you make your three choices if you
think only to choose the best you risk making an opening for someone
bad, so '''you must also consider who can win'''.
Look at the endorsements:
It is clear that only some have the standing to keep
a bad person off the board. So even if you know in your heart that
someone else is better, you should not pick them because if you do
your vote is WASTED.
If you have already voted and made the error of picking the wrong people you
can still change your vote but you must do it right away before the