http://www.podcastingnews.com/archives/2005/03/ourmedia_offers.html
A story on the Podcasting News website describes Wikipedia as one of the "partners in the effort" to launch the Ourmedia project. Is this true? I realize that Angela is one of their advisors, but I hadn't heard that there was any kind of official partnership. Is there some kind of ongoing discussion that the community doesn't know about, or are people just being sloppy about the nature of the connection?
--Michael Snow
Michael Snow wrote:
http://www.podcastingnews.com/archives/2005/03/ourmedia_offers.html
A story on the Podcasting News website describes Wikipedia as one of the "partners in the effort" to launch the Ourmedia project. Is this true? I realize that Angela is one of their advisors, but I hadn't heard that there was any kind of official partnership. Is there some kind of ongoing discussion that the community doesn't know about, or are people just being sloppy about the nature of the connection?
Well, I've never heard of them, but the ourmedia.org site has a little Wikipedia logo and link under 'Sponsors and partners' on every page of their site.
http://ourmedia.org/mission/partners says: "Wikipedia is the people's encyclopedia. The free content encyclopedia — where anyone can write or edit an entry — produced more than 1 million articles in less than four years. Wikipedia is already larger than any other English-language encyclopedia, including the Encyclopædia Britannica. What's most remarkable is that every word is written by volunteers and no one gets paid for a submission. Wikipedia and Ourmedia members are committed to creating sharing and sharing works of personal media."
It sounds more like 'some similarities in mission' than a 'partnership', and linking to Wikipedia instead of Wikimedia seems kind of odd if it really is official and nobody's bothered to tell us.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:25:45 -0800, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net wrote:
A story on the Podcasting News website describes Wikipedia as one of the "partners in the effort" to launch the Ourmedia project. Is this true?
I'm not entirely sure what it means for Wikipedia to be listed as a "partner", but my assumption was that it was a reflection of potential collaboration or shared goals between the projects, rather than anything more formal. I did speak to Jimbo about this a few weeks ago when I first saw this on the Ourmedia site, since I wasn't sure if this should be seen as a problem. He said he didn't care for it, but when I suggested I could have it removed, he just said he had complained a bit (I don't know who to), and also said that it was not a ridiculous statement. He's met with Marc Canter (one of the founders of Ourmedia) since then, but I don't know if they discussed this point.
As far as I know, the "partnership" means no more than the people involved in the projects they list as partners (including the Creative Commons) are also involved with Ourmedia, which is possibly why they list Wikipedia rather than the Wikimedia Foundation (though that could just be an error). Certainly, no formal partnership has been discussed. The only link between the two projects comes from the fact that I, and other Wikipedians, have been involved with creating some of the project's initial policies etc, and that ideas for potential collaboration have been discussed on the Wikimedia Commons since last August (when the page was still at Meta). See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Collaboration_with_Ourmedia
Angela.
-- Angela Beesley Ourmedia.org
Note that I am not aware of any partnership with OurMedia myself, nor was ever informed we could be or were.
The only thing I know... is that other associations started listing themselves as being partners with wikipedia. I raised the topic on the french mailing list about what could be a partner and how to decide who was a partner and who was not.
The discussion was inconclusive and in spite of me saying to the association representative we were actually not partners, they still sort of more or less claim it.
After thought, I decided that 1) I could not do much if someone claimed himself partner of Wikipedia 2) As long as it was written nowhere on our project that we were (no special page, no logo, no statement), well... we were not.
...
Anthere
Angela a écrit:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:25:45 -0800, Michael Snow wikipedia@earthlink.net wrote:
A story on the Podcasting News website describes Wikipedia as one of the "partners in the effort" to launch the Ourmedia project. Is this true?
I'm not entirely sure what it means for Wikipedia to be listed as a "partner", but my assumption was that it was a reflection of potential collaboration or shared goals between the projects, rather than anything more formal. I did speak to Jimbo about this a few weeks ago when I first saw this on the Ourmedia site, since I wasn't sure if this should be seen as a problem. He said he didn't care for it, but when I suggested I could have it removed, he just said he had complained a bit (I don't know who to), and also said that it was not a ridiculous statement. He's met with Marc Canter (one of the founders of Ourmedia) since then, but I don't know if they discussed this point.
As far as I know, the "partnership" means no more than the people involved in the projects they list as partners (including the Creative Commons) are also involved with Ourmedia, which is possibly why they list Wikipedia rather than the Wikimedia Foundation (though that could just be an error). Certainly, no formal partnership has been discussed. The only link between the two projects comes from the fact that I, and other Wikipedians, have been involved with creating some of the project's initial policies etc, and that ideas for potential collaboration have been discussed on the Wikimedia Commons since last August (when the page was still at Meta). See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Collaboration_with_Ourmedia
Angela.
-- Angela Beesley Ourmedia.org
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 06:46:53 +0100, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
The only thing I know... is that other associations started listing themselves as being partners with wikipedia. I raised the topic on the french mailing list about what could be a partner and how to decide who was a partner and who was not.
Related to this is that the Open Directory Project claims Wikipedia is their sister project. See the end of http://dmoz.org/Reference/, for example. This was mentioned at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:External_links#More_restrictive_... but not really discussed on Wikipedia as far as I know. There is (or at least used to be) a "Wikipedia now a Sister site?" thread at Dmoz http://forums.dmoz.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=908066 (you need to be an editor there to read it, and my login has expired so I can't guarantee that link still works).
Angela.
On 3/24/05 1:18 AM, "Angela" beesley@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 06:46:53 +0100, Anthere anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:
The only thing I know... is that other associations started listing themselves as being partners with wikipedia. I raised the topic on the french mailing list about what could be a partner and how to decide who was a partner and who was not.
Related to this is that the Open Directory Project claims Wikipedia is their sister project. See the end of http://dmoz.org/Reference/, for example. This was mentioned at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:External_links#More_restrictive_... licy_on_external_linking but not really discussed on Wikipedia as far as I know. There is (or at least used to be) a "Wikipedia now a Sister site?" thread at Dmoz http://forums.dmoz.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=908066 (you need to be an editor there to read it, and my login has expired so I can't guarantee that link still works).
And this torques me off, because Dmoz is a frighteningly corrupt and autocratic community and their licensing and copyright policy is diametrical to Wikipedia's. Maybe if they were willing to admit to being our evil stepsister.
I've sent Ourmedia a note through their contact form asking for clarification.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
Hi Everyone,
I'm interested in chatting with someone who has set up a wiki site. I'm interested in opening one up, but I don't know a lot about how to get the software onto a server, how to work at the administrative level with it (ie creating pages, etc) and how much time/work is involved.
If anyone is willing to answer a few questions, I'd appreciate it.
I've owned paramedicine.com since about 95 and it used to be a huge site - then my kids were born and I didn't have the time to do all the work. Now they're getting a bit older, and I'd like to get back to my dream of a website by paramedics for paramedics. The wiki software looks just perfect for that, however, I wouldn't mind being able to have some banner ads to help cover server costs.
Is that OK? Can you use the wiki software to make a site and then have ads on it and income? If not, is there a way to run a wiki site of your own (i.e. paramedicine.com) on the wiki server for free?
I know ... maybe I'm dreaming, but I'm still learning about wiki. Thanks for any answers.
Marc
________________________ Marc Colbeck, BHSc Critical Care Paramedic Paramedic Instructor College of the North Atlantic - Qatar work: marc.colbeck@cna-qatar.edu.qa home: marc@colbeck.ca
Hi Marc,
If you have questions on installation or administration you preferably ask at mediawiki-l or irc://freenode.net/mediawiki for help.
The Wikimedia Foundation only takes a few projects under it's cover, I doubt you want to dig into the process of that. So, install it on your own server, modifiy the skin to your needs and put some ads up to cover the hosting cost. There are a few commercial offers like Wikicities which can take all the work from you.
BTW: http://paramedicine.com should point to the www. site.
ciao, tom
That sounds interesting, I'll look into wikicities.
Thanks Tom. ________________________ Marc Colbeck, BHSc Critical Care Paramedic Paramedic Instructor College of the North Atlantic - Qatar work: marc.colbeck@cna-qatar.edu.qa home: marc@colbeck.ca ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thomas R. Koll" tomk32@gmx.de To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" foundation-l@wikimedia.org Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 11:59 AM Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Starting a 'wiki' site
Hi Marc,
If you have questions on installation or administration you preferably ask at mediawiki-l or irc://freenode.net/mediawiki for help.
The Wikimedia Foundation only takes a few projects under it's cover, I doubt you want to dig into the process of that. So, install it on your own server, modifiy the skin to your needs and put some ads up to cover the hosting cost. There are a few commercial offers like Wikicities which can take all the work from you.
BTW: http://paramedicine.com should point to the www. site.
ciao, tom
-- == Weblinks ==
- http://verlag.tomk32.de/ - WikiReader Digest als Print-Ausgabe
- http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:TomK32
- http://www.hammererlehen.de - Urlaub in Berchtesgaden
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 11:38:27 +0300, Marc Colbeck marc@colbeck.ca wrote:
I'm interested in chatting with someone who has set up a wiki site.
The MediaWiki mailing list is best for this, since that is aimed at people using MediaWiki on their own sites. See http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l to subscribe.
I don't know a lot about how to get the software onto a server, how to work at the administrative level with it (ie creating pages, etc) and how much time/work is involved.
There are a lot of wiki hosting companies that would do this for you. There's a list at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wiki_Science:How_to_start_a_Wiki#.22Hosted_wiki.22_and_Wiki_hosts
I'd like to get back to my dream of a website by paramedics for paramedics. The wiki software looks just perfect for that, however, I wouldn't mind being able to have some banner ads to help cover server costs.
You can download the software from http://mediawiki.org and customize the skin to add adverts if you want since it is open source. However, I would recommend that you consider putting your content at Wikibooks instead. There are already a number of medical books at http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Category:Medicine. See http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Emergency_Medicine for example.
Angela
Michael Snow wrote:
http://www.podcastingnews.com/archives/2005/03/ourmedia_offers.html
A story on the Podcasting News website describes Wikipedia as one of the "partners in the effort" to launch the Ourmedia project. Is this true? I realize that Angela is one of their advisors, but I hadn't heard that there was any kind of official partnership. Is there some kind of ongoing discussion that the community doesn't know about, or are people just being sloppy about the nature of the connection?
I complained very strongly to them about it before they launched their site publicly, and so I really don't know what else to say about it. It is not my style to speak ill of people, so I think I'll just say nothing at all.
--Jimbo
On Mar 28, 2005 11:19 PM, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
I complained very strongly to them about it before they launched their site publicly, and so I really don't know what else to say about it. It is not my style to speak ill of people, so I think I'll just say nothing at all.
Wikipedia has been removed from the partners page as a result of this complaint.
I contacted the founders of Ourmedia about this, who basically felt that the link suggested a potential collaboration, much in the same way that the page at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Collaboration_with_Ourmedia does. It also reflected the fact that Ourmedia uses Wikipedia as a resource on pages such as http://ourmedia.org/help/publish-audio and has had the imput of many Wikipedians into its policies.
JD said "Partnership, to us, means that we are pursuing the same goals. If you look at our Partners page, it makes no claim about any formal relationship between Ourmedia and Wikipedia. This is simply a list of sites that we're working with" and Marc said the partnership shows that we both "support the notion of shared repositories".
The issue is also being discussed on our forums at http://ourmedia.org/node/1552
Angela.
Angela wrote:
On Mar 28, 2005 11:19 PM, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales jwales@wikia.com wrote:
I complained very strongly to them about it before they launched their site publicly, and so I really don't know what else to say about it. It is not my style to speak ill of people, so I think I'll just say nothing at all.
Wikipedia has been removed from the partners page as a result of this complaint.
I'm glad that's been resolved, at least.
I contacted the founders of Ourmedia about this, who basically felt that the link suggested a potential collaboration, much in the same way that the page at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Collaboration_with_Ourmedia does.
The Wikipedia logo was displayed prominently under a heading "Sponsors and Partners" on *every page of the site*, and again prominently displayed with the Wikipedia listing on their Partners page.
How's that even *vaguely* on the same level as having a single discussion-oriented page on a community-built site that starts off with text like "Since Ourmedia share one of the goals of the Wikimedia Commons, it would be good if we could collaborate with them in some way. Please use this page to brainstorm ways in which we could do this. Ideas left here will be fed back to the ourmedia group on their wiki." ?
JD said "Partnership, to us, means that we are pursuing the same goals. If you look at our Partners page, it makes no claim about any formal relationship between Ourmedia and Wikipedia. This is simply a list of sites that we're working with" and Marc said the partnership shows that we both "support the notion of shared repositories".
Perhaps we should chip in and buy JD a dictionary? Sooner or later the poor fellow's going to be at the wrong end of a trademark lawsuit.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org