>From my experience the key of success is giving good courses for teachers.
Apart of that by only reading Wikipedia you loss a lot of pedagogical
advantages you get in editing. I think providing an offline wiki sandbox and
later uploading the best contributions to Wikipedia could be a goog idea.
You also could promote English - Swahili translations. These activities are
always a plus by learning simultaneously languages and other topics.
I look forward to meet you soon in Drumbeat Festival in Barcelona and talk
more in detail.
Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 14:00:29 +0000
> From: Abbas Mahmoud <abbasjnr(a)hotmail.com>
> Subject: [Foundation-l] Proposed Wikimedia Project in Kenya
> To: Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <BLU116-W263245CE61FF1CDCB0DA9CA5F0(a)phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> Hi folks,
>
> As some of you may know, there exists a small bunch of Wikipedians in
> Kenya. In the last couple of months, we have been discussing ways in which
> we might increase Wikip\media awareness within Kenya. We then decided to
> experiment by starting by using offline Wikipedia in primary & secondary
> schools.
>
> We still are at a very early stage: the framework/proposal is still
> sketchy. Please check it out at
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Kenya/Project_for_Kenyan_Schoolsand give us your feedback. Feel free to edit, redaft or whatever you may
> call it so that we can come up with a more concrete proposal.
>
> Looking forward to getting your collaboration.
>
> Yours,
>
> m|Abbas.
>
Austin Hair, you have very recently publicly stated: "Greg Kohs went beyond
being merely critical (which is welcome, and even encouraged) to the point
of being antisocial and counterproductive."
This is in follow-up to calling him "completely unable" to keep
contributions "civil".
In the past, David Gerard has insinuated that he is a "dick" on the list you
moderate. Phoebe Ayers has hinted that "harassment" may be a problem of
his. Neither member of the list has been publicly rebuked by any on your
moderating team, though their insinuations are offensive to us.
However, you were asked privately, and Samuel Klein as well, to please point
out what has been uncivil (and now "antisocial") about any of the last five
of Kohs' posts to the Foundation-l mailing list. You have failed to respond
to that question. Samuel has failed to respond to that question.
So, I ask here, what has been uncivil or antisocial about any of the most
recent five of Kohs' posts to Foundation-l?
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061602.htmlhttp://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061461.htmlhttp://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-October/061456.htmlhttp://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060702.htmlhttp://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-August/060441.html
This should take no more than 3 or 4 minutes of your time. You refuse to
take that time, yet you find the time to label Kohs "antisocial" (which is
really quite comical, considering his expansive list of friends on
Facebook).
How many hours have already been wasted on Foundation-l, thanks to your
recent judgment? How many more hours will be wasted as we move forward with
the next steps? (You don't really think this is "over", do you? Kohs will
likely return with sockpuppets on the mailing list. He is relentless when
prodded.) Or, you could just admit that you've made a mistake, apologize,
and then we all move on. He's already gotten bored with Wikisource,
Wikibooks, and Wikiversity, where he's been unblocked -- and yet given
excellent free content before he faded off.
H.N.
Here's a new job offered on Freelancer.com:
"Description
Wikipedia writer needed for historic building/hotel in a major city. The
wikipedia page already exist but it is not too detailed to reflect its
rich history.
There are lots of widely published articles about it so it shouldn't be a
difficult task. A longer article with detailed research and quality work
is important.
All sources must be referenced correctly according to Wikipedia
guidelines so that it would not be rejected. An experienced Wikipedia
writer is a plus!
Please reply with your experience and show me your writing samples if
posible. "
http://www.freelancer.com/projects/Research-Technical-Writing/Wikipedia-Edi…
Is this an acceptable project? How should someone who gets this contract
handle it?
Fred
In a message dated 10/23/2010 2:43:02 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
wiki-list(a)phizz.demon.co.uk writes:
> If at any moment it can be stood on its head then the information
> contained in the articles can never be authoritative. Suppose I have a
> calculator that every once in a while, and quite randomly, adds up two
> numbers wrongly, such a calculator wouldn't be authoritative in its
> results, even when it added the numbers correctly.
>
> For some things, like who played who in 'West Wing', it is of little
> importance. For medical issues the accuracy is highly important, and if
> one can't guarantee that each page load contains the accurate
> information then one shouldn't be pretending that it is in any way
> authoritative. >>
>
"Importance" is not relevant to "authoritative" they are x and y on the
graph. But I think it's mean it doesn't matter whether an article on the West
Wing is "authoritative" because no one will die over it. Which is the same
straw man you want to throw up... murder! rape! death! child porn!
Straw men and extreme arguments. Any person who believes anything, in any
source, whatsoever from Aardvark to Zoology, without corraboration, is
simply not living in the world of today. Wikipedia is as accurate, if not more
so, then almost any other souce in existence. Not only as accurate, but
citing the sources which underlie the claims therein made, and providing links
directly to those sources, which no other competitive entity can claim.
*That* you choose to view things differently and expect dogma and the
subsequent abdication of critical thinking, is not the failing of the project.
Each person is responsible for their own reliance on their own chosen
sources. Anyone who chooses not to rely on Wikipedia, can instead rely on their
copy of the 1982 EB if they wish. Anyone who chooses to rely on Wikipedia had
better start learning how the system works if they want to criticize it.
W
Encyc. Dramatica seems too take pride in creating attack pages regarding
Wikipedians. Of course they are exposing themselves to libel suits but
looking at some of the rest of their site this seems to be the least of
their worries with a great deal of racist content as well as underage
pornography.
Wondering if we have any measures available to deal with these attacks
against Wikipedia? Or have others who have considered this issue feel that
attempting anything would 1) be futile 2) just promote the creation /
promotion of more such content.
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, B.Sc.
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:45 AM, Sue Gardner <sgardner(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I want to let you know that as of this Friday, October 22, 2010, Mike
> Godwin will be leaving his role as General Counsel for the Wikimedia
> Foundation.
> ...snip...
> The search for his successor will begin immediately. It's being
> conducted by the recruiting firm m|Oppenheim.
> ...snip...
> --
> Sue Gardner
Just a matter of inquiry, why didn't the search start when Mike handed
in his notice, compared to now when he has left? With a role like this
wouldn't it make sense to have it refilled as soon as possible to give
the best chance of a change over period?
-Peachey
A quick update on our inflated page view stats:
Ryan's hypothesis that deployment of the new CentralNotice banner
loader had something to do with it has been confirmed.
So those extra page views were actually internally generated requests,
which accessed just two new special pages in huge amounts.
Special:BannerController and Special:BannerListLoader
http://stats.grok.se/en/201010/Special%3ABannerListLoaderhttp://stats.grok.se/en/201010/Special%3ABannerController
Dev team has devised a fix but it will require proper testing at a suitable
moment,
so the situation will remain as is for a few more days.
It will be possible to fix our stats by substracting view counts for these
special pages
in all languages from hourly input files. I hope to do this first week of
November.
Erik Zachte
If you are counting votes, please count mine for moderation.
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 02:23:16 +0100, "Virgilio A. P. Machado"
<vam(a)fct.unl.pt> wrote:
> Three days after the announcement made by Austin Hair on behalf of
> this list administrators, which also includes Ral315 and
> AlexandrDmitri, that Greg Kohs was banned and Peter Damian moderated,
> this much has been accomplished by about 41 posts on that subject:
>
> 1) Austin Hair, Ral315, and AlexandrDmitri continue to be the list
> administrators;
>
subscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l