Wikimedia-l July 2007

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

145 participants
135 discussions

[Foundation-l] checkuser
by Florence Devouard 31 Jul '07

31 Jul '07

Greetings, I got several requests about this, so this mail is mostly to get the ball rolling. Nothing urgent ! Checkuser ombudsmen have been appointed now a year ago by the board. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Ombudsperson_checkuser I guess it is time for a renewal and little feedback on this, and more generally, on checkusers. So, please reflect on the following points if appropriate 1. is there any change to the checkuser policy that you might wish to suggest ? If so, please comment here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Checkuser (talk page) 2. are they currently checkusers who still do not comply with the data access policy ? Perhaps Cary can give a private feedback on this. 3. are they inactive checkusers ? If so, according to policy, they should be removed. Can someone make a summary of activity, in the same way that stewards activity perhaps ? 4. is there any change to the privacy policy that you might wish to suggest ? If so, http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy (talk page) 5. is there any change to suggest about the ombudsmen committee role ? Clarifications ? If so, please here: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_committee (talk page). 6. last year, ombudsmen committee was appointed by the board. Maybe this year, we can do it differently, and have the community approve/vote people and Foundation "sanctify" the community choice ? If so, how would you suggest doing that ? Similar that steward election ? Or is there another preferred solution ? Please take the time to give a feedback on this within the next 2-3 weeks, so that we can move on end of august on the topic. Thanks Ant

10 20

Re: [Foundation-l] checkuser
by Gregory Maxwell 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

On 7/30/07, Casey Brown <cbrown1023(a)comcast.net> wrote: > I agree that the Ombudsman committee are supposed to hear all privacy policy > violations, and that this includes things other than CheckUser. The only > thing is, most of these disputes arise from a CheckUser, which is the most > public item on our list of possible privacy policy violations. Privacy policy violations are fairly difficult to cause without being checkuser, someone with server access, or a few other things. While oversight has privacy implications it's a corner case. Has anyone actually suspected that the use of oversight has *created* a privacy policy issue? The primary risks of the use of oversight are not privacy related. Keep in mind that the privacy policy only covers the foundation's stewardship of non-public data. If you leak your IP by accidently editing while logged out and some unkind regular user maliciously spreads the information around, it would be a bad thing and, no doubt, a blockable offense on the jerk's part, as per the standards of our communities.... but it would not be a violation of the foundation privacy policy.

2 1

Re: [Foundation-l] #wikipedia IRC channel guidelines review
by GerardM 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

Hoi, When it is horrid to state that something is wrong at the bases ie meaning that this cannot be said, then indeed it is horrid. I doubt also very much that there is any effective control over the #wikipedia-* channels. If it is to asserted it in the same way as it was done with the #wikipedia channel it will not create the same uproar, it will be much worse. When there is indeed jurisdiction over multiple channels, it is because of these channels being Wikimedia Foundation related. Not more not less. Thanks, GerardM On 7/30/07, Casey Brown <cbrown1023(a)comcast.net> wrote: > > First, what a horrid thing to say. Second, by Wikipedia-affiliated he > meant > the #wikipedia-* channels on IRC. That is where Mark's jurisdiction is, > and > that is what the guidelines are for. I do not see what the problem with > his > statement was. > > Casey Brown > Cbrown1023 > > -----Original Message----- > From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org > [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of GerardM > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 1:44 PM > To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List > Cc: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org; English Wikipedia > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] #wikipedia IRC channel guidelines review > > Mark, > There are Wikimedia affiliated IRC channels on Freenode. > Thanks for getting even the basics wrong. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 7/30/07, Mark Ryan <ultrablue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hello everyone. > > > > As a few of you may know, about 5 weeks ago some new guidelines were > > put into place on meta for the IRC channel #wikipedia. At the same > > time, the operator access list for the channel was emptied and started > > from scratch. > > > > The changes were quite unpopular, to say the least. A discussion > > thread was started about them on the foundation-l mailing list, but > > probably should have been started on wikipedia-l. > > > > Now that I am back from my holiday, I have opened a review discussion > > about the guidelines on their talk page on meta, which you can access > > at the follow URL: > > > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:IRC_guidelines/wikipedia > > > > I would very much appreciate the input there of all people who have an > > interest in the guidelines, and indeed any users of the > > Wikipedia-affiliated IRC channels on Freenode. > > > > ~Mark Ryan > > > > _______________________________________________ > > foundation-l mailing list > > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >

2 2

Re: [Foundation-l] #wikipedia IRC channel guidelines review
by Aphaia 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

On 7/31/07, Casey Brown <cbrown1023(a)comcast.net> wrote: > First, what a horrid thing to say. Second, by Wikipedia-affiliated he meant > the #wikipedia-* channels on IRC. I think I understand what you would like to mean, but it is still too much broad. >That is where Mark's jurisdiction is, and > that is what the guidelines are for. Or is it reallly mean other wikipedia-* channel should be ruled by English speakers? It's more than horrid. I do not see what the problem with his > statement was. > > Casey Brown > Cbrown1023 > > -----Original Message----- > From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org > [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of GerardM > Sent: Monday, July 30, 2007 1:44 PM > To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List > Cc: wikipedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org; English Wikipedia > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] #wikipedia IRC channel guidelines review > > Mark, > There are Wikimedia affiliated IRC channels on Freenode. > Thanks for getting even the basics wrong. > Thanks, > GerardM > > On 7/30/07, Mark Ryan <ultrablue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Hello everyone. > > > > As a few of you may know, about 5 weeks ago some new guidelines were > > put into place on meta for the IRC channel #wikipedia. At the same > > time, the operator access list for the channel was emptied and started > > from scratch. > > > > The changes were quite unpopular, to say the least. A discussion > > thread was started about them on the foundation-l mailing list, but > > probably should have been started on wikipedia-l. > > > > Now that I am back from my holiday, I have opened a review discussion > > about the guidelines on their talk page on meta, which you can access > > at the follow URL: > > > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:IRC_guidelines/wikipedia > > > > I would very much appreciate the input there of all people who have an > > interest in the guidelines, and indeed any users of the > > Wikipedia-affiliated IRC channels on Freenode. > > > > ~Mark Ryan > > > > _______________________________________________ > > foundation-l mailing list > > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- KIZU Naoko Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *

1 0

[Foundation-l] Logotype font, t-shirts, Wikimedia Sweden
by Lars Aronsson 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

Inspired by the creation of Wikimedia Norway (which I attended), we are now starting to discuss the formation of a Swedish chapter. I hope and think it can be completed before this year's end. The recent discussion (in Swedish) can be found on http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikimedia_Sverige A similar discussion from a year ago took place on meta, but didn't lead to anything real. The page mentioned above links to all such discussions. Even before the chapter is formed, I think it would be nice to print t-shirts with the logotype for the Swedish Wikipedia. However, today this logotype doesn't exist in high resolution. And the small resolution logotype used on sv.wikipedia.org appears to use a font which is slightly different from the one used for the other European languages. What is the name of the proper font? Is that font available in Gimp? Or can someone help us with this? WMF already has a t-shirt shop at cafepress.com (in California) and the German chapter has a shop at spreadshirt.de. Both shops charge extra for delivery to Sweden, so the Swedish chapter would probably prefer to set up a similar shop based in Sweden. Is there any established practice in how to do this? Does every use of the logotypes need to be cleared with the WMF? Should items be sold at the price of printing or with a 10% markup, for the benefit of the national chapter? I remember at the first Wikimania (in 2005) there was a large flag with the Wikipedia puzzle globe without (?) any text. Does anybody already have a stock of such flags? I know they can be printed in single quantity, but become much cheaper once you can print five or ten at a time. I'd like to buy one or two, and my guess is that Wikimedia Norway might also be interested. -- Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se) Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se

14 23

Re: [Foundation-l] checkuser
by Dan Rosenthal 29 Jul '07

29 Jul '07

Off topic, but why does my email appear to be coming from the bounces address with "on Behalf of Dan Rosenthal" in the title? Is something broken on my end? -Dan On Jul 28, 2007, at 8:33 PM, Casey Brown wrote: > How many cases there were... > What were the accusations... (nothing specific i.e. what sort of > abuse) > Where they all solved... (how fast?) > What were the threats... > > There are many other possible questions as well. It is best to see > what the > Ombudsman themselves share. > > Casey Brown > Cbrown1023 > > -----Original Message----- > From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org > [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Dan > Rosenthal > Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 7:47 PM > To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] checkuser > > > On Jul 28, 2007, at 7:13 PM, elisabeth bauer wrote: > >> 2007/7/29, Florence Devouard <Anthere9(a)yahoo.com>: >>> Greetings, >>> >>> I got several requests about this, so this mail is mostly to get the >>> ball rolling. Nothing urgent ! >>> >>> Checkuser ombudsmen have been appointed now a year ago by the board. >>> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/ >>> Resolution:Ombudsperson_checkuser >>> >>> I guess it is time for a renewal and little feedback on this, and >>> more >>> generally, on checkusers. >>> >>> So, please reflect on the following points if appropriate >> >> I'd like to add one point: >> Could the ombudsmen please provide a report on the mailing list >> (without going into private details of course) how many cases they >> have handled, what have been the issues and how they have been >> resolved? >> >> greetings, >> elian >> >> _______________________________________________ >> foundation-l mailing list >> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > I can't see why that would be necessary. Considering the ombudsman > commission is there to investigate breaches of privacy policy, > including potentionally litigious instances (as taken from the > resolution), I don't see what's necessary out of that for the public > to be aware of. I don't see much information would be available to be > given about the cases individually due to privacy concerns: what > little information would be left is what...how many cases there are? > > -Dan Rosenthal > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

2 2

Re: [Foundation-l] checkuser
by Florence Devouard 29 Jul '07

29 Jul '07

oh, sorry; of course. My mistake. Ant Casey Brown wrote: > Perhaps it may be best to point discussions of the privacy policy itself to > the *meta* talk page, considering that not all users have accounts on the > Foundation wiki and that wiki itself isn't the ideal location for > discussions. > > So that would be <http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Privacy_policy>. > > Casey Brown > Cbrown1023 > > -----Original Message----- > From: foundation-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org > [mailto:foundation-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Florence > Devouard > Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2007 6:32 PM > To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > Subject: [Foundation-l] checkuser > > Greetings, > > I got several requests about this, so this mail is mostly to get the > ball rolling. Nothing urgent ! > > Checkuser ombudsmen have been appointed now a year ago by the board. > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Ombudsperson_checkuser > > I guess it is time for a renewal and little feedback on this, and more > generally, on checkusers. > > So, please reflect on the following points if appropriate > > 1. is there any change to the checkuser policy that you might wish to > suggest ? If so, please comment here: > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Checkuser (talk page) > > 2. are they currently checkusers who still do not comply with the data > access policy ? Perhaps Cary can give a private feedback on this. > > 3. are they inactive checkusers ? If so, according to policy, they > should be removed. Can someone make a summary of activity, in the same > way that stewards activity perhaps ? > > 4. is there any change to the privacy policy that you might wish to > suggest ? If so, http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy > (talk page) > > 5. is there any change to suggest about the ombudsmen committee role ? > Clarifications ? If so, please here: > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman_committee (talk page). > > 6. last year, ombudsmen committee was appointed by the board. Maybe this > year, we can do it differently, and have the community approve/vote > people and Foundation "sanctify" the community choice ? If so, how would > you suggest doing that ? Similar that steward election ? Or is there > another preferred solution ? > > Please take the time to give a feedback on this within the next 2-3 > weeks, so that we can move on end of august on the topic. > > Thanks > > Ant > > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

1 0

[Foundation-l] Wiki does not exist
by Aphaia 28 Jul '07

28 Jul '07

Hello, mistyping the URL to OTRS top page, I eventually got "wiki does not exist" page. https://secure.wikimedia.org/ It is quite outdated, for example - No mention to the projects launched in 2004 or later (missing Wikinews, Commons etc) - Klingon Wikipedia is included - Only Wikipedia and Wiktionary language versions are presented Supposedly the page was set up in the mid 2004 before Wikiquote and Wikibooks were divided into language? I think none wants to keep it as is, but renew it to reflect our current situation. If you know somewhere this issue is discussed, please gimme the link. Thanks. Cheers, -- KIZU Naoko Wikiquote: http://wikiquote.org * habent enim emolumentum in labore suo *

3 2

Re: [Foundation-l] Alternative approach for better video support
by Michael Snow 26 Jul '07

26 Jul '07

Anthony wrote: > There are differing interpretations of what a transparent format is > (most of which are pretty obviously incorrect), but distributing more > than 100 copies on paper without providing any digital copy at all > pretty clearly violates the requirement to have a machine readable > copy. Leaving aside for a moment the current state of GFDL legalism vis-a-vis technology, I don't see any fundamental reason why a paper copy couldn't qualify as machine-readable. There are some pretty substantial endeavors focusing on just that sort of thing. If you meant that it fails to meet the GFDL's definition of "transparent" you might have a stronger point. But that's a legalism-and-technology issue. Despite the charges some pundits like to raise, there is no philosophical reason for us to be enemies of the printed word. Let's not allow our technological inadequacies to lead us into dismissing the medium that has, over the course of history, spread more free knowledge to more people than the Wikimedia Foundation has ever managed. --Michael Snow

3 2

[Foundation-l] Second Wikipedia Academy
by Frank Schulenburg 25 Jul '07

25 Jul '07

Dear all, Last week, Wikimedia Deutschland announced the second Wikipedia Academy to be held in Mainz on August 24th and 25th, 2007. This year the conference will focus on the humanities in Wikipedia, aiming for a dialogue between researchers and Wikipedians. Wikimedia Deutschland organizes the conference in cooperation with the Mainz Academy of Sciences and Literature, one of the seven great German Academies of Sciences. For the first time, the Wikipedia Academy will be sponsored by the German Ministry for Education and Research. Wikimedia Deutschland was chosen as an official partner of the "Year of the Humanities", an annual event organized by the ministry that started in 2000 and focuses on a different discipline each year. The conference will be opened by Doris Ahnen, Minister of Education, Research, Youth und Culture in Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany, and Elke Lütjen-Drecoll, President of the Academy of Sciences and Literature. One of the conference highlights will be the award ceremony for the "Johann Heinrich Zedler Medal". Wikimedia Deutschland and the Mainz Academy of Sciences and Literature award this prize for an outstanding encyclopedia article in the area of the humanities. The Zedler Medal comes with 3,000 Euro and is sponsored by the German scientific journal "Gehirn&Geist". The selection jury consists of seven renowned scientists (among them Johannes Fried, former president of the Association of German Historians, and Michael Stolleis, former president of the Max-Planck-Institute of European Legal History), a journalist of "Gehirn&Geist" and a German Wikipedian. The award ceremony starts with a lecture by Professor Ulrich Johannes Schneider, director of the Leipzig University Library, on "Johann Heinrich Zedler's Universal-Lexicon and the premature attempt to start Wikipedia in the 18th century". On Saturday, August 25th, the conference will end with a panel discussion on "Perspectives to communicate sciences for a large audience in the New Media". More information about the second Wikipedia Academy: http://www.wikipedia-academy.de (official website) http://www.wikimedia.de/2007/07/wikipedia-trifft-geisteswissenschaftler/ (in German) More information about the Zedler Medal: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Zedler-Medaille (with photo) http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Heinrich_Zedler (featured article about Zedler) Regards, Frank Schulenburg Wikimedia Deutschland e. V.

3 2

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 July 2007