John:
> For the "Page Views" data on some projects, the May data
> looks unusually lower than the June data;
> could it be that the May data isn't
> a complete month for some projects?
Yes, that is indeed the case. I will omit the incomplete month on subsequent
reports.
Erik Zachte
w00t!
Perhaps we can do a data dump of .au localities as well to be combed
through by en:wp editors ...
(no, NOT making rambot articles automatically, human consideration ;-)
- d.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jessica Coates <j2.coates(a)qut.edu.au>
Date: 2008/12/23
Subject: [Wikimediaau-l] CC licensing implemented for the ABS
To: "cc-au(a)lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-au(a)lists.ibiblio.org>,
"cc-community(a)lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-community(a)lists.ibiblio.org>,
"cc-nz(a)lists.ibiblio.org" <cc-nz(a)lists.ibiblio.org>,
"cci(a)lists.ibiblio.org" <cci(a)lists.ibiblio.org>,
"asia-commons(a)googlegroups.org" <asia-commons(a)googlegroups.org>,
"wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org"
<wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Those following the post a few weeks ago about the announcement by the
Australian Bureau of Statistics that they were going to release their
material under a Creative Commons licence will be pleased to know that
it's happened.
All content on the ABS website (other than logos and other trade
marked content) is now marked as CC BY - including all census data,
economy data, fact sheets, analysis, press releases etc.
Hopefully this will just be the start of a general move towards open
access by the Australian public sector.
For more information see http://creativecommons.org.au/node/207
_______________________________________________
Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
Hoi,
Given that some of our Betawiki localisers have not provided us with their
e-mail address and given that this is an open call to contribute to our end
of your localisation effort, I forward this mail to you all.
Help us to end 2008 with a bang and in the process you can help yourself or
the Wikimedia Foundation to some bucks..
Thanks and happy holidays,
GerardM
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Siebrand Mazeland
Date: 2008/12/24
Subject: [Mediawiki-i18n] Betawiki staff thank you and season greetings
To: mediawiki-i18n(a)lists.wikimedia.org, translators-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Dear translators, developers, and other subscribers,
As Betawiki staff we would like to thank you very much for your continued
support making MediaWiki projects succeed, and hope on good health for you
and your loved ones, and your continued contributions for 2009.
End of December 2007 Siebrand formulated localisation goals for MediaWiki
For 2008[1]. They were ambitious. Really ambitious, and it looks like the
four goals that were set are not going to be met. However, us Betawiki staff
do not give up without a fight. There is still one more week left before the
year ends, and because of that we would like to give you an incentive.
== 1,000 Euro bounty ==
Together with Stichting Open Progress[2] we are able to make available 1,000
Euro, to be divided between all translators that will make 500 or more new
translations for MediaWiki or its extensions before the end of the year. In
the past week there have been 5 users that made more than 500 translations,
so that is quite an incentive, we think! If you are eligible to claim your
share of the bounty, please do that at the designated page[3]. Please note
if you would like to receive your cut, have us donate it to the Wikimedia
Foundation on your behalf, or if you do not claim it, in which case
Stichting Open Progress will repurpose it.
We wish you happy and productive holidays and hope to see you (re)visit
Betawiki often!
Betawiki Staff[4]
[1]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/translators-l/2007-December/000571.html
[2] http://openprogress.org/Stichting_Open_Progress
[3] http://translatewiki.net/wiki/Translating:Language_project/500claim
[4] http://translatewiki.net/w/i.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=staff
_______________________________________________
Mediawiki-i18n mailing list
Mediawiki-i18n(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-i18n
I assume most of you at least occasionally read one of the Wikimedia
websites so probably saw this in a sitenotice, but I thought it was a
very well done appeal, concisely highlighting exactly what we do, why
it's different than what most people do, and why we're worth donating
to, so worth pointing out:
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate/Letter/en
Worriers about the perennial suggestions to put advertising somewhere on
the site(s) might also like what appears to be the closest to a no-ads
pledge I've seen so far: "Like a national park or a school, we don't
believe advertising should have a place in Wikipedia".
-Mark
Anybody alive?
The iteration goes like:
* I start to talk about low activity on the list.
* Erik mentions that new step toward license migration has been happened.
* Others get some idea to talk about.
* The new iteration of discussion begins.
So, let's try: This list became dead once again!
It works and isn't terribly invasive, and realistically financial difficulty will find sympathy right now. I think it's brilliant.
-----Original Message-----
From: "Erik Moeller" <erik(a)wikimedia.org>
Subj: Re: [Foundation-l] Jimmy Wales donation appeal
Date: Tue Dec 23, 2008 7:00 pm
Size: 3K
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
2008/12/23 effe iets anders <effeietsanders(a)gmail.com>:
> Up to now, I kinda liked the fundraiser. Although they are very shouty for
> what I'm used to (I dislike the red button for instance and the somewhat
> agressive tone), I think this last change in message could use a *little*
> step back. Please use a slightly smaller font, an slightly less shouty text.
> To me it really reads like " wow, now we're really desperate, PLEASE COME
> READ THIS ** APPEAL". I would really appreciate it if this last banner would
> be done a little less in a way that comes to me (justified or not) as
> "typical American"...
Within the last 24 hours, we've raised a total of $283,859. That's
more than 10 times as much as we made during a typical weekday in the
last few days of the fundraiser, and the single highest day on record
for community gifts. We don't know yet how steep the inevitable
drop-off will be, but it's obvious that the appeal is working beyond
everyone's expectations.
I think it's worth noting that this tenfold increase has been possible
without the use of additional pixel real estate, without scrolling
marquees, interstitials, or other serious interruptions of the
Wikipedia reader/editor experience. All it took were less than 60
characters of text on each page in a highly visible font, linking to a
personal appeal that makes our case in more detail.
We should ask ourselves why it is that based on the previous
sitenotices, 9 in 10 people who would be clearly willing to give to
us, did not do so. There seem to be at least three principal reasons
for that:
* The previous messages were below the visibility threshold for most
people: They considered them to be an unimportant part of the page
that should be ignored.
* The previous messages did not, clearly enough, make a case for
giving. They appealed to people who instantly "get" the non-profit
donation model, but not to those for whom Wikipedia is essentially the
same as any other website. The appeal directly addresses this
distinction, to the satisfaction of a great number of people.
* Because it's a personal appeal, rather than an impersonal donation
message, the letter seems more likely to resonate with people.
Regardless of how the numbers will hold up, it's clear that these are
important lessons to take away: The appeal, compared to some of our
other site-notices, was trivial to implement. It's more important to
communicate clearly and in a personal manner what we're trying to do
than to focus on widgets & designs.
Yes, more so than before, this appeal communicates a sense of urgency.
As it should: We still have a revenue gap of $1.75M to just cover our
expenses for the fiscal year (let alone increase our reserve). We're
in the middle of the worst financial crisis in our lifetime; companies
are failing or laying off staff around us. If people's reaction is "I
don't want Wikipedia to go away - I better donate", that's not a bad
thing.
Obviously we should try to work out any remaining display glitches.
And I'm sure over time we'll find a "happy medium" when it comes to
aspects like font size, color, etc. But more importantly, we should
try to translate this appeal into as many languages as possible, as
it's currently just running in the English language wikis.
--
Erik Möller
Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--- message truncated ---
> For those who haven't seen it yet:
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserStatistics
Very neat!
Looking at tab 2 (Number of contributions):
In 2007 from day 14 and onwards the number of gifts per day more than
doubled.
Is it known why that happened? Just curious.
Erik Zachte
FYI, the state of local image uploads on en:wp. How's your wiki doing?
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Mark Wagner <carnildo(a)gmail.com>
Date: 2008/12/23
Subject: [WikiEN-l] Image tagging: 33 months later
To: English Wikipedia <wikien-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Back in March of 2006, I did a check of image uploading. The results
were, to put it bluntly, appalling.
I've re-done the check with a new batch of 1,945 images. This covers
a little over two days' uploading, where the original set was 1,866
images uploaded in a little over 24 hours.
For 1,945 images uploaded and not later deleted, 1,960 license tags
were applied.
858 images, or 44%, were tagged with a non-free content tag, up from
40% in 2006. with album covers and logos making up slightly more than
half. The vast numbers of promotional photos that were uploaded in
2006 are nowhere to be seen: only 20 images were so tagged.
At least 917 images (47%) were tagged with a free-content license tag,
up from 41% in 2006. The most popular tags are PD-Self (334 images),
GFDL (250 images), and Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike (221
images)
Only 176 images (9%) did not have a license tag, a vast improvement
over 2006, when 26% were untagged.
500 of the images were checked for tag correctness. Things are
looking *much* better than they were in March 2006: of the 494 tags
applied, 35 (7%) were clearly incorrect, and 34 invalid fair-use
claims were made. In 2006, the error rates were 22% incorrect and 16%
invalid fair-use claims.
The most-misused tag by count is the self-creation tag (at least 21
images were not self-created), with the GFDL/CC-BY-SA-3.0 dual-license
tag especially problematic. By proportion, it's CC-BY-3.0 (5 out of
12 incorrect).
On the non-free content side of things, the problematic tags are
{{non-free television screenshot}} (6 out of 10 used to illustrate a
person's biography), {{non-free audio sample}} (3 out of 4 samples
were over-long), and {{non-free promotional}} (2 out of 3 images were
clearly replaceable). As before, album covers and logos tended to be
used correctly (74 out of 84 and 46 out of 57, respectively).
28 out of 254 free-content tags were incorrect, compared to 7 out of
205 non-free-content tags. Breaking non-free content down by type of
media and getting rid of the generic "fair use" tags ("promotional",
"fair use", etc.) seems to have worked wonderfully.
We still need to do something about people uploading images with
incorrect information, but it's far less of a problem than it used to
be.
--
Mark
[[User:Carnildo]]
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Many times we raised the issue that many (maybe majority of) users of
Wikimedia content don't realize that it is possible to edit pages on
Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects. Last time I was talking about
it a couple of days ago, during the conference in Belgrade, with a
Polish Wikimedian, Marcin Cieslak.
I was thinking about some big button "edit" on every page. And, by
accident, I realized now that Polish Wikinews emphasized their "edit"
button [1]. I think that this may be a good thing for the beginning
for all Wikimedian projects. Maybe, it should be even a default in
MonoBook skin on MediaWiki.
[1] - http://pl.wikinews.org/wiki/Strona_g%C5%82%C3%B3wna