Where can you request the Wikimedia Office to step in and remove a part of a
I can't speak in more details, but in a series of wikipedia pages on 4
projects there is content that could harm the wikimedia foundation in a
legal way. I tried to get it done with the local admins but they refuse,
what will be the next step to get a opinion for a office action?
Webhosting the wicked way.
Hi folks - xposting from Wikimedia Announce
*The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation renews $3 million commitment to Wikimedia
SAN FRANCISCO, CA – July 11, 2011 – The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, a
philanthropic grantmaking institution that supports science, technology and
economic institutions, announced today that it will award a grant of $3
million (USD) to the Wikimedia Foundation, the non-profit that operates
Wikipedia. This is the second grant of this amount awarded to the Wikimedia
Foundation from the Sloan Foundation’s Universal Access to Knowledge
component of its Digital Information Technology program. The Wikimedia
Foundation is delighted to have received this vote of continued confidence
in its work.
The Sloan Foundation’s first grant of $3 million, awarded from 2008 through
2010, is the largest single grant ever received by the Wikimedia Foundation.
These funds bootstrapped the organization so that it could grow its core
operations to support and sustain Wikipedia as a high-quality free knowledge
resource. The new funds will support Wikimedia's strategic plan that focuses
on increasing Wikipedia’s quality, increasing the number and demographic
diversity of its editors, and reaching more readers, particularly in the
“Three years ago, at a time when cultural elites were ambivalent about
Wikipedia, the Sloan Foundation took a risk by supporting us. I will always
be grateful to Sloan for its courage in doing that,” said Sue Gardner,
Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation. “Today the academic
community in particular has begun to appreciate Wikipedia, and is starting
to work closely with us to make it even better. I’m grateful to Sloan for
sending an important signal that helped make that happen, and I’m thrilled
at this renewed expression of confidence in our work.”
"We are delighted to support Wikimedia in developing and sustaining its
educational mission while continuously improving quality, diversity and
access to knowledge for people everywhere," said Doron Weber, Vice
President, Programs at the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. "Wikipedia embodies
the ideal values of the world wide web and we are proud to be part of this
bold endeavor to use the wisdom and the altruism of the crowd to create the
biggest, most up-to-date and most open global encyclopedia in human
*About the Wikimedia Foundation
The Wikimedia Foundation is the non-profit organization which operates
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. According to comScore Media Metrix,
Wikipedia and the other projects operated by the Wikimedia Foundation
receive more than 390 million unique visitors per month, making them the 5th
most popular web property world-wide (May, 2011). Available in more than 270
languages, Wikipedia contains more than 18 million articles contributed by a
global volunteer community of more than 100,000 people. Based in San
Francisco, California, the Wikimedia Foundation is an audited, 501(c)(3)
charity that is funded primarily through donations and grants.
*About the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
The Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, a New York based philanthropy founded in
1934, makes grants to support research and education in science, technology,
engineering, mathematics and economic performance. Sloan's program in
Digital Information Technology/Universal Access to Knowledge aims to
increase access to human knowledge and the fruits of human culture in an
open, non-exclusive manner for the benefit of all. The program has supported
the Digital Public Library of America, the Library of Congress, the Internet
Archive, Lyrasis, and on-demand books to help achieve the goal of universal
Head of Communications
+1 (415) 839 6885 x 6609, @jansonw
Re "The problem are those people who can't read." One of my concerns
is that in setting our target at the world population we inevitably
set ourselves up to fail - though I accept that arbitrary minimum
reading ages are of little use, and the youngest 10% of a population
can mean the under tens or the under 4s.
But I don't think we should be to concerned about literacy by 2050.
Someone is bound to have designed a proper speech based interface by
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 13:14:21 +0200
> From: Thomas Goldammer <thogol(a)googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] List of Wikimedia projects and languages
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> 2011/7/11 emijrp <emijrp(a)gmail.com>:
>> @Thomas and @Andre: I know that it is very hard to mantain a Wikipedia in
>> 'remote' or 'almost extinct' languages, but, if we don't save as much as we
>> can of them (including words, grammar, culture, social values), how are we
>> going to offer 'all human knowledge' ?
> We offer this knowledge by having articles about the grammar, culture
> and social values of these languages, and by having wiktionary entries
> for the words of these languages. We do not need to have the human
> knowledge *in* these languages. It would be nice, but it's not
> necessary to reach the ultimate goal to offer all human knowledge.
>> How many people don't
>> understand any Wikipedia today?
> Of those who can read at all, probably much less than 1%. The problem
> are those people who can't read.
I want to know if there is a privacy concern on the Dutch Wikipedia.
The short story:
When you got blocked on the Dutch Wikipedia for socking you can remove the
block by sending a copy of your passport to a user thats trusted by the
community. After he checks your passport or all the passports involved if
you have a shared connection the block will be removed.
The user where you have to send it to isn't indentified by the foundation
and you have to send it by snailmail not to OTRS.
The foundations privacy policies does that allow this to happen?
If I might interject, it seems that the sole purpose of the snail mail
described is to link a physical person to a login name in such a way
that there is some accountability for one's actions that is acceptable
to the organization. Is it really necessary to copy an identity
document? Could a document with a notary seal accomplish much the same
purpose without the need for a copy (and thus avoid possible legal
issues arising from making such a copy)?
We had similar identity concerns when CAcert <http://www.cacert.org/>
became intercontinental - originally one had to go through a somewhat
complicated process with two notarys, etc. to gain certain trust levels,
but as the project grew and the founders began to travel all over the
world it became possible to meet in person with an "Assurer" and present
one's identity documents (which were NOT copied) and thus gain points
towards becoming a trusted person to the certification authority (ie.
able to generate server keys chained to the CAcert organization's root
On 7/9/2011 4:45 AM, foundation-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
> I do think it is absolutely a problem when people on a WMF-hosted wiki
> are using an unofficial mechanism to demand copies of people's
> Note that WMF does not allow local communities to do other things that
> if the local community is all for it.
> When passports are requested of people on the wiki, does the requester
> stress that this is not WMF-official, not covered by the privacy
> policy and there is no official oversight whatsoever of the mechanism?
> It looks to me like Huib has alerted us to a potentially disastrous
> privacy time bomb.
It's with great pleasure that I announce a longtime Wikipedian and
accomplished Wikimedia project supporter, Tilman Bayer (User:HaeB) has
agreed to join the Wikimedia Foundation in support of our movement
communications activities. Pending approval of the U.S. immigration
visa process, we intend to bring Tilman to San Francisco, full-time,
as Manager, Movement Communications in the coming months. Tilman will
augment Wikimedia's communications team (now at three!) and will
report to me.
Tilman will be known to many in the English Wikipedia community as
editor-in-chief of the Wikipedia Signpost, where over the past year
(after picking up the reigns from another current WMF staffer, Sage
Ross) he has led the publication’s dedicated crew of volunteers and
increased the depth and breadth of stories about Wikipedia, our
projects, and the movement as a whole. Tilman has also helped raise
the overall visibility of Signpost beyond the English Wikipedia,
building a significant social media presence (managing and bolstering
its Identi.ca and Twitter feeds), and generally increasing the reach
of the stories about Wikipedia to more editors and readers than ever.
Tilman has been active in both the German and English WP communities
since 2003 (he's been a checkuser on the German Wikipedia since 2006).
He holds degrees in mathematics from the University of Cambridge and
the University of Bonn.
At the Wikimedia Foundation Tilman will be working with all WMF staff,
and the community at large, to help us both build new movement
communications systems, and work with tech and the community
department to produce great specifications for user communication
oriented projects. We’re particularly interested in improving
feedback, discussion, and broadcast channels among and outside of the
projects (including social media, variations on mailing lists etc).
In short, we want to introduce more painless, relevant, and effective
ways to increase the exchange of information within the community -
including information you want to share with everyone, as well as the
stuff from WMF.
Tilman will be visible on the projects and IRC, and you will likely
start to see him posting to the mailing lists, blogs, and on-wiki.
He’s also currently in the process of working on succession for the
editorial leadership with the Signpost.
Please join me in welcoming Tilman!
Head of Communications
+1 (415) 839 6885 x 6609, @jansonw
On Fri, Jul 8, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Dominic McDevitt-Parks
>>> On 8 July 2011 16:47, Samuel Klein<meta.sj(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Right. NARA has 5 billion pages of PD content online, as I learned
>>>> this morning. Is it 'a website'?
>>> Do you have a cite for that? Could probably be added to:
> Actually, I think the point that David Ferriero was making, to give you a
> sense of the immensity of their digitization struggle, was that that is the
> size of their *holdings*.Their digital collections are not even be in the
> millions yet; the current official number is 153,000 (documents, so the page
> count could still be much higher) digitized and described at the item-level
> in the catalog, though there may be some thousands more not in the catalog
> in online exhibits. They do, of course, have an increasing number of
> born-digital documents as well. It's a huge undertaking. As I mentioned
> earlier today, only 68% of the holdings of National Archives are even
> cataloged, and many of these are not even item-level descriptions, so they
> are not even at the point yet where they know everything they have. Some
> statistics: <http://www.archives.gov/research/arc/about-arc.html>.
Aha, that's a handy stats page. So we aren't not totally dwarfed by
other online collections; maybe by a single order of magnitude by the
free-content book collections out there.
Is Wikipedia the largest "free content" website? i.e. website
consisting primarily of free content.
The only competitors that I can think of are
1. Project Gutenberg, however they have a few free-gratis etexts
sprinkled through their collection.
2. Million Books Project http://www.ulib.org/