Please for the love of God STOP SENDING ME EMAILS!!! On May 29, 2007, at 1:46 PM, foundation-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Send foundation-l mailing list submissions to foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to foundation-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at foundation-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of foundation-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
- Re: Meta Ban (Alex Newman)
- Re: Wikikids (Nicholas Moreau)
- Re: Wikikids (Angela)
- Re: Wikikids (teun spaans)
- Re: Meta Ban (Azdiyy)
- Re: Wikikids (Mathias)
- Re: Wikikids (Samuel Klein)
Message: 1 Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:20:48 +0100 From: "Alex Newman" alex9891@hotmail.co.uk Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: BAY119-F21F2A735C12BF8C0B022468B2F0@phx.gbl Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
Azdiyy wrote:
Hello, Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if they think their ban on meta is unjustified.
trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others) led nowhere. m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if meta is not suitable for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too much imo.
many thanks, azdiyy
Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not Meta. Maybe your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually looked at all your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather unsuitable to me.
Alex (Majorly)
New, exclusive and FREE - Download Madonna's "Hey You" now! http://www.liveearth.msn.com
Message: 2 Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:17:34 -0400 From: "Nicholas Moreau" nicholasmoreau@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: 2540ad290705290717u3e8d6658o378f8bba60ccbd2c@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and the "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it notes:
"GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
which means:
"USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO THIS END AUTHORISATION!"
But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
Nick
Message: 3 Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 15:41:14 +0100 From: Angela beesley@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: 8b722b800705290741l46e9a095k4af5cecbe0fc43c4@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau nicholasmoreau@gmail.com wrote:
On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and the "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it notes:
"GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
This is just the default message in MediaWiki. You can see the same thing in the original version of the Dutch Wikipedia - http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning&oldid=178550
But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
The wiki is GFDL. The edit page links to http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:Auteursrechten which says that the text on Wikikids is released under the same licence as on Wikipedia, namely the GFDL.
Angela
Message: 4 Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:44:04 +0200 From: "teun spaans" teun.spaans@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: 8fb899d70705290744g577e2797p451de62dca21db72@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
This is just a warning that users should not use copyrighted material unless they have permission.
It is a bit out of sight, but another page says: De teksten op Wikikids worden vrijgegeven onder dezelfde licentie als op Wikipedia http://nl.wikipedia.org/, namelijk de GFDL-licentiehttp://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html The texts on wikikids are being made available under the same license as Wikipeda, that is the GFDL license.
I wish you health and happiness, teun spaans
On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau nicholasmoreau@gmail.com wrote:
On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and the "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it notes:
"GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
which means:
"USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO THIS END AUTHORISATION!"
But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
Nick
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Message: 5 Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:25:48 +0100 From: Azdiyy azdiyy@googlemail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: 6af34c650705290825k5479f911n8ae92ca2339dc15e@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
if they're unsuitable, what about warning the 'offender' or a short ban? Azdiyy
On 29/05/07, Alex Newman alex9891@hotmail.co.uk wrote:
Azdiyy wrote:
Hello, Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if they think their ban on meta is unjustified.
trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others) led nowhere. m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if meta is not suitable for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too much imo.
many thanks, azdiyy
Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not Meta. Maybe your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually looked at all your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather unsuitable to me.
Alex (Majorly)
Message: 6 Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 19:19:42 +0200 From: Mathias mathias.damour@laposte.net Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: 465C60AE.D7FA4210@laposte.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Hi,
Robert Horning a ?crit :
mathias.damour wrote:
Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia want children to be involved in building this content. We want to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest. See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
I have serious doubts about the ability of children to get involved in this process, other than to the extent that they already are involved with Wikimedia projects. There are minors (including some that have administrator access... as discussed in some earlier threads) who are involved with Wikipedia content (and a few I suspected on Wikibooks as well), but these tend to be kids that are exceptionally motivated. And they participate on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects as peers to everybody else who is a contributor, with no special distinction. While the idea of having kids write for kids sounds appealing on paper, a bunch of 4th graders write like... well... a bunch of 4th graders. They are still trying to learn the basic mechanics of writing, and ought to be learning how to write from those who have already mastered the skill, not from those who are still apprentices in the subject. I digress if you think some contributors on Wikipedia don't know how to write, but that more or less proves my point as well.
It would be nice to have a feed-back from those who are involved in the Wikikids.nl project on this point. I would say a few things :
- We choosed not to make special distinction related to age on
Vikidia (no more than on Wikipedia). It is just asked that if you tell your age on your user page, you shouldn't cheat about it, just as you shouldn't cheat about your Diploma/academic degree on Wikipedia. (It's written in the disclaimer that a user could be blocked if he cheat about his age, but that you shouldn't assumed that it has been checked.)
- 8-13 years is the readers target age. They are welcomed to edit, but
adults so as - say - 13-18 years are welcomed too. We could guess that quite a lot of these (teenagers) could be willing to edit in a wiki, but don't feel able to do it on Wikipedia. They can be pleased to do it for younger people. That's what happen on Vikidia, where teenage editors are quite importants.
- it seems that children are not able to write as much as older
people, but they could do a quite good job on one subject. Anyway, it's a wiki so their articles are to be bettered by others (which can be formative to them). They can aslo get involved in maintenance task (internal links...) which make them become active readers rather than only content recipient. Participation of children is nevertheless something like a pillar for these wikis.
What I'm trying to point out is that those who are involved with Wikijunior were not even contacted about this idea in the first place when the idea was originally brought up on Meta, and suggestions on Meta to look at the Wikijunior project as perhaps something to work with were met with incredible hostility by those suggesting this Wikikids project. This doesn't have to be an either-or situation, as I believe the sum is healthier than the individual parts alone.
I'm not sure I understand well ; "This doesn't have to be an either-or situation" do you mean that they can be book for children AND adults on Wikibooks, or that they can be wikibooks AND an encyclopedia for children. That's what I would say.
I am presuming that you are writing about this because you want to seek input from the Wikimedia community, and would like to enlist support for those who might want to get involved with a project of this nature. I'm merely suggesting here that there are individuals who may want to join in this sort of project, and you should try to join with these efforts. There have been some attempts in the past to move Wikijunior to a completely separate project and domain name, including forming Wikijunior as a completely independent Wikimedia sister project. One of these proposals, and not rejected by the Wikijunior community, was to move to a more Wikipedia-like format of articles rather than the themed collections organized into books such as currently exist on Wikibooks. Please ask those involved with the development of Wikijunior to at least comment on your ideas. For English Wikijunior, the best place is at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:Wikijunior
What all this concept is lacking is a very motivated leader who is willing to take the next step and demonstrate that there is a large concensus among those want to go this route. And unlike the problems that existed with Wikiversity on Wikibooks, there is virtually nobody who wants to see Wikijunior "kicked off" of Wikibooks. Wikijunior enjoys a nearly independent existence without having to worry about the project overhead of maintaining a separate group of admins, and a strongly symbiotic relationship exists as well between Wikibooks and Wikijunior to bring new users and contributors to both projects. I think that Wikijunior would struggle with a great many issues if it had an independent existence at the moment that it doesn't have to worry about right now.
I had a look to the wikijunior pages in english and french. On the english talk page, the topic on a separated website is about either a read- only website for safe reading for children, or a separate wikibooks. I can understand that if wikijunior should still aim to writes books, there is no determining utility to make a separate wiki for it. But the wikikids idea is quite different, since it has a "Wikipedia- like format" as you say, and for it aims to let children write on it.
I don't know if wikijunior could (and would like) to move to that, and anyway "This doesn't have to be an either-or situation" ;-)
Mathias Damour
Message: 7 Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:49:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Samuel Klein meta.sj@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Message-ID: Pine.LNX.4.64.0705291321090.25804@hera.hcs.harvard.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="x-unknown"
There are a few issues here, which should perhaps be addressed by more than one project.
- Simplifying language
Finding a way to provide versions of articles targeted at different audiences -- different levels of jargon or language complexity -- would be a valuable achievement. Our early effort with Simple-English remains a hack which needs improvement and localization.
Examples: simple english, simple spanish
- Writing for children
There is a long tradition of providing children with books about the world, including drawings, games, and activities; with a shift in focus, layout, and tone from more general encyclopedias. At the same time, I believe that most full-length English encyclopedias have for decades been primarily marketed for home use by schoolchildren...
Examples: Andrew Cates' SOS selection of Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Wikipedia_CD_Selection Wikijunior http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikijunior
- Projects by and for children
There is a need for space for younger authors to develop and share their own work. This may or may not be directly related to one of the above projects.
Examples: Few. UNICEF's Voices of Youth project offers some space for this sort of collaboration among their young contributors.
- Packaging things into books v. ongoing development of articles
This has been a slightly confusing distinction since we started putting 'books' into digital form, breaking the traditions of bound and printed works one by one. There are useful distinctions b/t wikipedia and wikibooks, and likewise between a children's encyclopedia idea and wikijunior, but they are as much philosophical as unavoidable. This is especially true as books become more and more modular, and parts of books are used in multiple works.
It would be good to start a discussion and collaboration including interested groups... and to seed a children's encyclopedia with some of the existing material that is in other formats.
The advantage to 3) over the others is that projects whose primary audience can contribute directly to their development have an excellent model for sustained growth.
SJ
On Mon, 28 May 2007, mathias.damour wrote:
Hi,
Robert Horning wrote:
Mathias wrote:
Such a wiki has been launched in french (in which I am
involved) see an english explanation about it: http://fr.vikidia.org/index.php/Vikidia:About and in Dutch (see http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:English_explanation None of them are Wikimedia project.)
Both have a quite active community and have reached 1000
articles.
(...) And Wikijunior is also quite multilingual, with some sort of Wikijunior project on nearly every language edition of
Wikibooks,
including French, German, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, and
English. In
many cases these "articles" or "modules" have been translated or rewritten in multiple languages as well, especially the original Wikijunior books of the Solar System and the Big Cats.
And Wikijunior is clearly a Wikimedia project in its own
right, other
than it is hosted concurrently with Wikibooks. Try http://en.wikijunior.org/ to see where the wikijunior domain
goes.
This isn't to say that some effort shouldn't happen to
perhaps expand
the range of this proposal, but it seems like the largest
problem it has
faced is an ever fragmenting community and leaders who
havn't had the
desire to keep the project moving. Writing literary content for children is not an easy task, and it takes a focused
community to keep
the project growing.
Wikijunior is clearly a wikibooks project. I mean that it is not a Wikipedia-like project, and being hosted on the wikibooks wiki makes impossible several feature of Wikipedia. For example you can't make easy internal wikilinks : wikilink to "Aluminum" is not [[Aluminum]] but [[Wikijunior The Elements/Aluminum]]. The "oxygen" page: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior_The_Elements/Oxygen should only tell about the element, not the dioxygen gas. (it does indeed, and doesn't make it clear between one and the other) and it doesn't make it easy to create another page about the gas, since this wikibooks is about the elements.
Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia want children to be involved in building this content. We want to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest. See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
I don't think that "fragmenting community and leaders" is a real danger now that several Wikipedia have reached such a huge size both in articles and in editors.
Some people have had the idea to make either special articles or a special wiki for children of each grade, or even for each grade AND each school. (because you would have to explain in a different way to a 9 years old child than to a 12 years old) see this discusion: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Talk:Wikis_for_children) I feel that it would be "fragmenting community" and that one single encyclopedic wiki for 8 to 13 year old children and for one language is a fair middle.
As for the health of Wikijunior books, many of them have reached "featured book" status as some of the "best of..."
Wikibooks, and on
en.wikbooks I would say that you could easily get much more
than 1000
modules that could easily seed an en.wikikids project. Many
of these
modules could on their own reach featured article status on en.wikipedia, but for the fact they are not on Wikipedia.
Rather than
try to dissect what went wrong with the previous attempt at
an English
language version of this project, I would suggest that you
try and see
what has been done "right" by Wikijunior and its development
community.
And certainly try to pool the efforts of this "Wikikids"
group and those
who are writing "Wikijunior" content. I have not seen any
effort to
recruit those involved with Wikijunior to help with this
proposal in any
meaningful way.
Do you tell about this attempt ? http://editthis.info/wikikidsen/Main_Page I didn't look at it closely, but I am afraid that it wasn't lead in a proper way. Another think is that there is "simple english wikipedia", whom no other equivalent have been created in any other language. I guess that it would make less easy to create a wikikids in english, as it would be partly similar to simple, and I would also say that the fact that this wiki is not so big and hasn't been created in other language may show that its aim would not be so clear, mobilizing and justifying.
The idea to seed from wikijunior could be good, so as the idea to create such wiki on the Vikidia and Wikikids.nl model. I can't say about Wikikids.nl, but if by chance they would be some encyclopedic wikis dedicated to children to open in other language, Vikidia (in french) would rather become a wikimedia project and work on it together than see them created by isolated groups in each language.
Hope to hear from you,
Mathias Damour
Cr?ez votre adresse ?lectronique prenom.nom@laposte.net 1 Go d'espace de stockage, anti-spam et anti-virus int?gr?s.
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 38, Issue 101