Wikimedia-l October 2011

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

164 participants
136 discussions

[Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] General Assembly of Wikimedia Argentina
by Patricio Lorente 14 Oct '11

14 Oct '11

Dear friends, I'm glad to announce that last saturday Wikimedia Argentina held its General Assembly. As a result of the Assembly, a new board was elected and the annual plan for 2012 was approved. The new board is: President: Patricio Lorente VicePresident: Galileo Vidoni Secretary: Ivana Lysholm Vicesecretary: Nicolás Georgetti Treasurer: Leandro Ferrari Vicetreasurer: Patricio Molina Members: Nahuel Kahles, Lila Pagola, Evelin Heidel Alternate members: Mariano Pérez, Beatrice Murch Patricio Lorente on behalf of Wikimedia Argentina _______________________________________________ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Foundation-L, the public mailing list about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. For more information about Foundation-L: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list WikimediaAnnounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l

2 3

[Foundation-l] Reminder: IRC office hours with Sue Gardner on Friday, Oct. 14th
by Steven Walling 14 Oct '11

14 Oct '11

Reminder that this is happening in a few moments. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Steven Walling <swalling(a)wikimedia.org> Date: Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 12:10 PM Subject: IRC office hours with Sue Gardner on Friday, Oct. 14th To: foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org Hi everyone, Just a quick note that this Friday (Oct 14th) at 17:00 UTC, Sue Gardner will be in #wikimedia-office to have an open discussion. As usual, instructions and time conversion links are on Meta.[1] Also, for those of you who have asked about office hours with someone *other * than Sue, we heard you. The next meeting after Sue's this week is with Chief Community Officer Zack Exley, in order to discuss the annual fundraiser. After that, myself or Community Liason Maggie Dennis (User:Moonriddengirl) are happy to take requests for other senior staff. -- Steven Walling Community Organizer at Wikimedia Foundation wikimediafoundation.org 1. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours -- Steven Walling Community Organizer at Wikimedia Foundation wikimediafoundation.org

1 0

[Foundation-l] New Delhi, India
by James Heilman 14 Oct '11

14 Oct '11

Wikimedia Canada in collaboration with Wikimedia India and the University of New Delhi is organizing a half day in New Delhi India. Anyone in the area is invited to attend. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Medicine/Delhi_2012 -- James Heilman MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

2 1

[Foundation-l] The image filter: Thoughts on the German/English question
by Andreas Kolbe 14 Oct '11

14 Oct '11

Having thought about the very divisive image filter discussions here, on de:WP, Meta, and elsewhere, including the August referendum and the more recent editor poll in the German Wikipedia, I would like to draw the Board's and other editors' attention to some fundamental differences between the German and English Wikipedias, which may explain some of the feelings and differences in attitudes we have observed. 1. The German Wikipedia mainly serves the German language area, which is a geographically contiguous and culturally fairly homogeneous area. 2. The English Wikipedia, in contrast, serves such disparate and culturally diverse regions as North America, Western Europe, parts of South and East Asia, Australia, and parts of Africa. As the biggest and most developed Wikipedia, it also covers much of the rest of the world where English is taught as a second language. 3. Looking at de:WP and en:WP, my feeling is that the use of illustrations in the German Wikipedia is generally more restrained, and the presentation more scholarly than in the English Wikipedia, including the controversial topic areas that were the subject of the Harris study. 4. To give an example: while the English article on the sexual practice of fisting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisting includes a real-life photo of anal fisting, the German article http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisting does not; its second image shows a glove, with a caption related to health issues. The German article contains significantly more information on health risks and potential long-term medical consequences of the practice than the English one. The English article, in contrast, contains information on notable porn performers, information which is entirely lacking in the German article. My impression, from reading several articles in this topic area in both projects, is that this is quite a representative example, illustrating fundamental differences in approach between the German and English Wikipedias, with the German Wikipedia generally aspiring to a more high-brow, rather than populist, approach. 5. To give another example, the famous autofellatio image included in the English Wikipedia, often discussed controversially in en:WP, is nowhere to be found in the German Wikipedia; the German autofellatio article http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Autofellatio&redirect=no is a redirect to the article on fellatio, which covers the topic of autofellatio in three sentences. The dedicated English article on autofellatio http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autofellatio in contrast runs to more than 500 words, with about half of it devoted to popular culture references. 6. In general, I feel that both the textual content and choice of illustrations in the German articles are not a significant challenge to German cultural expectations. Again, it's important to note that the German community has a much easier job here, as its target audience is fairly homogeneous, and in addition probably represents one of the sexually most open-minded cultures on the planet. If we combine this fact with the observation of the generally more restrained nature of the illustrations used in the German Wikipedia, I would hazard a guess that the size of the German-language adult demographic that would want to use a personal image filter while viewing the German Wikipedia is minute. I see no major concerns with German-speaking minors either. 7. In the English Wikipedia, on the other hand, we find far more explicit illustrations, a greater focus on pornography and Western popular culture, coupled with an extremely diverse target audience that includes some of the most sexually conservative cultures on the planet. These two elements work against each other, creating a vastly larger demographic potentially interested in a personal image filter. 8. It is important that there is a mutual appreciation of these basic differences. 9. I think editors in the German community have felt judged by people who don't properly understand their culture (probably not entirely without justification), and who don't appreciate that they are trying to do a responsible job, in line with the expectations of their target audience. In general, I would argue that they are successful in that endeavour. 10. At the same time, I feel that some editors from the German community have lacked a feel for how much more culturally diverse the target audience of the English Wikipedia (as well as Commons) is, in what respects editorial practice in the English Wikipedia differs from that applied in the German one, and why editors in the English and some other Wikipedia communities may feel more positive about the idea of a personal image filter than they do, as reflected in the referendum results. In general, the accusation most often made by German editors against editors from the US or UK is the one of personal prudishness (probably quite undeserved in many cases). 11. My suggestion to the Board would be to abandon the idea of the personal image filter for the German Wikipedia – I don't believe it is really needed, and the German community does not want it – but to pursue it vigorously for other projects, including in particular the English Wikipedia and Commons, and taking note of any regional variation in the referendum results. 12. Observations on other Wikipedias and projects are welcome. Best, Andreas

4 3

[Foundation-l] Letter to the community on Controversial Content
by Möller, Carsten 13 Oct '11

13 Oct '11

Sue wrote: > It is asking me to do something. > But it is not asking me to do the specific thing that has > been discussed over the past several months, and which the Germans > voted against. I may translate: As the German community has voted against filters, I was ordered to circumvent this vote by making some adjustments to the wording. That will not work. The vote was very clear agaist all image filters. The referendum was a farce, as we clearly see. Sorry, somebody is playing games with us.

4 4

[Foundation-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Fwd: [cultural-partners] 'This Month in GLAM' - September 2011
by Liam Wyatt 13 Oct '11

13 Oct '11

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Rock drum <wikirockdrum(a)gmail.com> Date: 12 October 2011 17:51 Subject: [cultural-partners] 'This Month in GLAM' - September 2011 To: *This Month in GLAM* is a monthly newsletter documenting recent happenings within the GLAM project, such as content donations, residencies, events and more. GLAM is an acronym of *G*alleries, *L*ibraries, *A*rchvies and *M*useums. You can find more information on the project at glamwiki.org. *This Month in GLAM – Issue VIII, Volume I – September 2011* ------------------------------ Front page http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011 >From the team: New reading feature http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011/Contents/… USA report: Jimmy Wales visits The Children's Museum of Indianapolis http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011/Contents/… UK report: Workshop in Coventry http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011/Contents/… France report: Monuments, seminars and workshops http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011/Contents/… Germany report: Outreach to the Historical Archive of Cologne http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011/Contents/… Australia report: Australian Paralympic Committee partnership http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011/Contents/… Calender: October's events http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011/Contents/… Single page view http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/September_2011/Single -- Subscribe<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_Message_Delivery/Targets/GLAM>• Newsroom <http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/Newsroom> • Archives <http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Newsletter/Archives> _______________________________________________ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Foundation-L, the public mailing list about the Wikimedia Foundation and its projects. For more information about Foundation-L: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l _______________________________________________ WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list WikimediaAnnounce-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l

1 0

[Foundation-l] The copyright question: What would Gandhi do?
by Achal Prabhala 12 Oct '11

12 Oct '11

A friend of mine in South Africa, Isabel Hofmeyr, passed on this image of the first page of the first edition of the English translation of Gandhi's "Hind Swaraj" - or "Indian Home Rule" in translation. (Hind Swaraj was the blueprint for India's freedom movement). The book was published in South Africa in 1909, and is rarely available. Isabel was able to see it courtesy Uma Dhupelia-Mesthrie, who owns a copy. And the copyright legend on this front page? It reads: "No rights reserved" Isabel and Uma kindly offered to donate the image to Commons, and you can see it here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gandhi-Home-Rule-First-Edition-1909.… Finally, an answer to the great copyright question that has never been asked: "What would Gandhi do?" :) Cheers, Achal

2 1

[Foundation-l] Image filter on spiegel.de
by David Gerard 12 Oct '11

12 Oct '11

http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/0,1518,791316,00.html - d.

1 0

[Foundation-l] Image filtering without undermining the category system
by WereSpielChequers 12 Oct '11

12 Oct '11

OK in a spirit of compromise I have designed an Image filter which should meet most of the needs that people have expressed and resolve most of the objections that I'm aware of. Just as importantly it should actually work. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:WereSpielChequers/filter WereSpielChequers

5 5

[Foundation-l] Image filtering without undermining the category system
by WereSpielChequers 12 Oct '11

12 Oct '11

> > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 15:36:09 +0300 > From: Jussi-Ville Heiskanen <cimonavaro(a)gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Image filtering without undermining the > category system > To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List > <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> > Message-ID: > <CAJ9-EKLWLrvaCucF-X0SVeOEQpJVowKD=-HTLTRui4msA=atsg(a)mail.gmail.com > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 2:24 PM, WereSpielChequers > <werespielchequers(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 11:55 PM, WereSpielChequers > > > > >> I really read that with a huge deal of thought. I keep coming to the > same > >> conclusion here that the people who don't not only believe a workable > >> system is desireable, but actively ignore the fact that what they are > >> proposing is not real world workable seem to dominate the side in > >> favor of some filtering scheme. > >> > >> Case in point: (from your proposal) > >> > >> "Whilst almost no-one objects to individuals making decisions as to > >> what they want to see, as soon as one person decides what others on > >> "their" network or IP can see you have crossed the line into enabling > >> censorship. However as Wikimedia accounts are free, a logged in only > >> solution would still be a free solution that was available to all." > >> > >> No, that is just simply not logically sound. Period. Wikipedia has no > >> control over what happens to content or the formats or abilities of > >> their scripts or whatever, as soon as it goes out of a intarweb pipe. > >> Period. Not tenable, even if you believe a non-censorship > >> enabling implementation is a good thing (I don't, but I am trying to > >> address the insanity of believing that it could ever be accomplished.) > >> > >> > >> > >> The issue of whether external agencies could hack this has already come > up > > on the talkpage. > > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:WereSpielChequers/filter > > > > The difficulty for anyone trying to do that is that they would be > attempting > > to read millions of pages as a logged in user without a bot flag. So > they'd > > probably get blocked as a denial of service attack. Even if someone > > subdivided their calls and created multiple accounts to read parts of the > > project from hundreds of different PCs they would only learn that someone > > had filtered in or out certain images. ?To replicate the filter they > would > > need to have each of those accounts flag certain images as filtered or un > > filtered - and at that point I would suggest that this has become a much > > more difficult thing to hack than simply extracting some of our existing > > categories. > > > > As your the second person to raise this I'll add an explanation to the > > proposal as to how this can be countered. > > > > > > Do you actually have any idea what a Big Mama is, or how much brute > computing power one of those has? > > -- > -- > Jussi-Ville Heiskanen, ~ [[User:Cimon Avaro]] > > > > If I wasn't somewhat aware of how Moore's law is working out in practice then I wouldn't have come up with a system that brute force alone would struggle to effectively crack. For a botnet to determine which images were on a filter would be non-trivial, especially if we put a throttle in the system to counter DOS attacks. But discovering that someone had chosen to filter an image without knowing who had done so and whether they were objecting to porn, spiders, military uniforms or factory farmed meat would not be that useful to a censor. I'm confident that it would be orders of magnitude more difficult to effectively crack this than it would be to extract other data from our systems that could be used by a censor - such as this list of not safe for work images https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Bad_image_list Do you have any other objections to this proposal? WereSpielChequers

1 0

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
...
14
Older →

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Wikimedia-l October 2011