Contrary to the widespread meme that Americans are ignorant, [some of the] US diplomatic cables are precious material for studying cultural diversity.
Building global movement requires reading documents about societies, like this one [1] is. Analysis is fully accurate, although 7 years old and some changes have happened in the mean time.
So, to understand the circumstances around building community or chapter in particular country, I strongly suggest reading relevant cables.
And, BTW, Wikipedia articles could be improved thanks to those cables.
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 08:32:59AM +0200, Milos Rancic wrote:
So, to understand the circumstances around building community or chapter in particular country, I strongly suggest reading relevant cables.
<3 Lots of work.
And, BTW, Wikipedia articles could be improved thanks to those cables.
We consider WL to be a reliable source?
(goes off to read)
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 08:32:59AM +0200, Milos Rancic wrote:
So, to understand the circumstances around building community or chapter in particular country, I strongly suggest reading relevant cables.
<3 Lots of work.
And, BTW, Wikipedia articles could be improved thanks to those cables.
We consider WL to be a reliable source?
(goes off to read)
Leaked cables are primary sources, some of which pose problems because they may contain non-public personal identifying information. Generally the information in them becomes available for our purposes after they have been analyzed by a peer-reviewed secondary source.
Fred
We consider WL to be a reliable source?
(goes off to read)
Leaked cables are primary sources, some of which pose problems because they may contain non-public personal identifying information. Generally the information in them becomes available for our purposes after they have been analyzed by a peer-reviewed secondary source.
Fred
Nevermind, thanks Fred.
-Dan
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 09:36:10PM +0300, Dan Rosenthal wrote:
Leaked cables are primary sources, some of which pose problems because they may contain non-public personal identifying information. Generally the information in them becomes available for our purposes after they have been analyzed by a peer-reviewed secondary source.
Nevermind, thanks Fred.
:-/
Do we know of any really good wiki that supports sane amounts of OR/SYN, more fine grained RS rules to match, and uses consensus to bring them all, and in the brightness bind them? ;-)
Wikinews would be perfect, except they have the whole news angle, which is not really all too handy for the longer work involving a lot of digging.
If not, can we start one? :-)
sincerely, Kim Bruning -- "And if that don't work, use MORE consensus!"
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 20:34, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
Leaked cables are primary sources, some of which pose problems because they may contain non-public personal identifying information. Generally the information in them becomes available for our purposes after they have been analyzed by a peer-reviewed secondary source.
This Michael Polt's analysis could be safely treated as secondary source. It obviously resumes his primary sources and it is in the form of secondary source, while not quoting primary sources. Besides that, there are similar works by sociologists in Serbian.
Yeah whatever was the final ruling on that, as to whether wikileaks cables can be cited? Dan Rosenthal
On Sun, Sep 4, 2011 at 7:59 PM, Kim Bruning kim@bruning.xs4all.nl wrote:
On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 08:32:59AM +0200, Milos Rancic wrote:
So, to understand the circumstances around building community or chapter in particular country, I strongly suggest reading relevant cables.
<3 Lots of work.
And, BTW, Wikipedia articles could be improved thanks to those cables.
We consider WL to be a reliable source?
(goes off to read)
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org