porfavor ya no deceo que me lleguen de su correo esta informacion no entiendo nada gracias

From: foundation-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: foundation-l Digest, Vol 46, Issue 103> To: foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:41:44 +0000> > 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%3E 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:> > 1. Re: Transparency (Ray Saintonge)> 2. Re: Transparency (Ray Saintonge)> 3. Re: thoughts on leakages (Robert Rohde)> 4. Re: thoughts on leakages (Jerome Banal)> 5. Re: a day in a life of a board member... and thoughts (geni)> 6. Re: Transparency (Aphaia)> 7. Rewriting proposal of Stewards Policy to be voted upon> (effe iets anders)> 8. Re: [Wikimediameta-l] Rewriting proposal of Stewards Policy> to be voted upon (Herby)> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------> > Message: 1> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:05:00 -0800> From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Transparency> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Message-ID: 478A8B0C.1050204@telus.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed> > Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:> > Actually, we must also realize that many (if not the majority) of the> > editors of even big wp projects like French, Japanese, or Russian, do not> > speak English or do not feel themselves confident enough in English. This> > means that they get all the messages about WMF through their own wp> > project (through the people who speak both languages, are involved somehow> > on a broader scope, and just select the material to be translated). For> > instance, there is no chance they can read this list, possibly they would> > even never know that the (open) list exists. I just do not see how the> > volunteer coordinator idea would work for these people. Unless, of course,> > we find the translators - but then, again, this is not the only point> > where translators are needed, and I just do not see how this could be> > done. In the end of the day, participants of even bigger projects feel> > disconnected from all decisions done at the WMF level, and do not feel> > like they influenced these decisions at all.> Very much so. The United Nations has from the beginning limited its > list of official languages. Is the EU any better off if it translates > long reports on narrowly focused topics from one obscure language into > another? It may not be politically appealing for a Chechen to > communicate in Russian, or for a Quechua to communicate in Spanish, but > unless the speakers of those languages are able to provide translator > services will remain limited. The most we can hope for is service in a > limited number of widely used languages, or languages with a high > on-line population like Japanese. Maltese may be official in the EU but > we can't realistically do anything about that.> > Ec> > > > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 2> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:18:47 -0800> From: Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Transparency> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Message-ID: 478A8E47.9040402@telus.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed> > Robert Rohde wrote:> > On Jan 9, 2008 3:16 PM, Andrew Whitworth wknight8111@gmail.com wrote:> > > >> I would disagree. In general, many members of the sister projects have> >> a strong sense of disconnect and disenfranchisement when it comes to> >> the WMF. This is especially true of the smaller projects and the> >> smaller non-english projects. The lines of communication are virtually> >> non-existant for these small projects. If it appears that the only> >> time the WMF cares about a small project is when something is wrong> >> and "action" needs to be taken.> >> > > While it may be worse for small and non-english projects, I think many> > participants in many of the larger projects also feel disconnected with> > WMF. Project participants are usually there because they enjoy creating> > something, but from the point of view of project participants the WMF is> > almost never directly involved in creating anything. The> > WMF mostly provides a behind-the-scenes service to keep the servers running,> > and many people would be perfectly happy if the WMF never, ever got> > involved in the governance of individual projects. When the WMF does get> > involved, many participants wonder: "Why are you messing with MY work."> It would be unwieldy for WikiCouncil to have representatives from each > and every project, given that in a one-admin project that person may > have his hands full just keeping that project going. WikiCouncil will > need a ratification policy, even for some of the most obvious policies. > If WC (with due note of Jimbo's recent English interview) wants all > projects to adopt the Five Pillars it would need to be subject to > ratification to avoid the impression that it is nothing more than an > en:wp policy being imposed on everyone else.> > Ec> > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 3> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 14:23:00 -0800> From: "Robert Rohde" rarohde@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] thoughts on leakages> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Message-ID:> b4da1c6e0801131423u12796404ha9b8ce3971c7356d@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1> > On Jan 13, 2008 5:56 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:> > > On Jan 13, 2008 6:51 AM, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com wrote:> > > On 1/13/08, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:> > > >> > > > <snip>> > > > One of the best protections we have against the Foundation being taken> > > > over by insane space aliens is good database dumps.> > >> > > And how long has it been since we had good database dumps?> > >> > > We haven't had an image dump in ages, and most of the major projects> > > (enwiki, dewiki, frwiki, commons) routinely fail to generate full> > history> > > dumps.> > >> > > I assume it's not intentional, but at the moment it would be very> > difficult> > > to fork the major projects in anything approaching a comprehensive way.> > >> > You don't really need the full database dump to fork. All you need is> > the current database dump and the stub dump with the list of authors.> > You'd lose some textual information this way, but not really that> > much. And with the money and time you'd have to put into creating a> > viable fork it wouldn't be hard to get the rest through scraping> > and/or a live feed purchase anyway.> >> > <snip>> > > > For several months enwiki's stub-meta-history has also failed (albeit> silently, you don't notice unless you try downloading it). There is no dump> at all that contains all of enwiki's contribution history.> > As for scraping, don't kid yourself and think that is easy. I've run large> scale scraping efforts in the past. For enwiki you are talking about >2> million images in 2.1 million articles with 35 million edits. A friendly> scraper (e.g. one that paused a second or so between requests) could easily> be running a few hundred days if it wanted to grab all of the images and> edit history. An unfriendly, mutli-threaded scraper could of course do> better, but it would still likely take a couple weeks.> > -Robert Rohde> > > ------------------------------> > Message: 4> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:50:54 +0000> From: "Jerome Banal" jerome.banal@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] thoughts on leakages> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Message-ID:> f758544d0801131450w7ed4793bme31a2c1d578fdeee@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8> > Scraping:> > Jeff Merkey was downloading all images used by enwiki in a day and a half> using 16 workstations just a few months ago with his wikix tool so this> is definitely possible.> > Not to be done by too much people too often of course but seldom are> those that have enougth bandwith anyway.> > He was actually redistributing this image dump through torrent but it was> taking a week to download it. As it was faster to download them> from WP, he killed the tracker.> > There is some info in this mailing list history (look around March/April)> and on the net.> The Linux executable is> < ftp://www.wikigadugi.org/wiki/MediaWiki/wikix.tar.gz.bz2> here> and it requires only a XML dump to work.> > If you want a torrent dump again, maybe he can provide one> again if you ask him politely.> > Jerome> > > 2008/1/13, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com:> >> > On Jan 13, 2008 5:56 AM, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:> >> > > On Jan 13, 2008 6:51 AM, Robert Rohde < rarohde@gmail.com> wrote:> > > > On 1/13/08, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:> > > > >> > > > > <snip>> > > > > One of the best protections we have against the Foundation being> > taken> > > > > over by insane space aliens is good database dumps.> > > >> > > > And how long has it been since we had good database dumps?> > > >> > > > We haven't had an image dump in ages, and most of the major projects> > > > (enwiki, dewiki, frwiki, commons) routinely fail to generate full> > > history> > > > dumps.> > > >> > > > I assume it's not intentional, but at the moment it would be very> > > difficult> > > > to fork the major projects in anything approaching a comprehensive> > way.> > > >> > > You don't really need the full database dump to fork. All you need is> > > the current database dump and the stub dump with the list of authors.> > > You'd lose some textual information this way, but not really that> > > much. And with the money and time you'd have to put into creating a> > > viable fork it wouldn't be hard to get the rest through scraping> > > and/or a live feed purchase anyway.> > >> > > <snip>> >> >> >> > For several months enwiki's stub-meta-history has also failed (albeit> > silently, you don't notice unless you try downloading it). There is no> > dump> > at all that contains all of enwiki's contribution history.> >> > As for scraping, don't kid yourself and think that is easy. I've run> > large> > scale scraping efforts in the past. For enwiki you are talking about >2> > million images in 2.1 million articles with 35 million edits. A friendly> > scraper (e.g. one that paused a second or so between requests) could> > easily> > be running a few hundred days if it wanted to grab all of the images and> > edit history. An unfriendly, mutli-threaded scraper could of course do> > better, but it would still likely take a couple weeks.> >> > -Robert Rohde> > _______________________________________________> > foundation-l mailing list> > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l%3E >> > > ------------------------------> > Message: 5> Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:09:45 +0000> From: geni geniice@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] a day in a life of a board member... and> thoughts> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Message-ID:> f80608430801131509i3146f616k5e86a95925df2163@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1> > On 12/01/2008, Florence Devouard Anthere9@yahoo.com wrote:> > I read recently someone complaining that they were not informed of> > on-going legal complaints. Let me tell you about the latest one.> >> > Between Christmas and New Year Eve, I got a phone call from the local> > gendarmerie (gendarmerie is what plays the role of police in rural areas> > in France). They had received a complaint, against me, for a problem on> > Wikipedia, and needed to receive me to inform me of the details of the> > complaint. I indicated I was on holidays, travelling, but would be back> > just before the 1st. They said "no problem, there is no urgency, let's> > pick up a meeting date in january sometimes. It is related to the> > Chateau de Luneville (a castle in the north east of France, near Nancy)".> > > Would french law consider wikipedia to be an organized group with> respect to potential fines and the like?> -- > geni> > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 6> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:34:42 +0900> From: Aphaia aphaia@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Transparency> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Message-ID:> 35be2a710801131534g58d0f886ib3d5bce17be1363d@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1> > On Jan 14, 2008 7:05 AM, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:> > Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote:> > > Actually, we must also realize that many (if not the majority) of the> > > editors of even big wp projects like French, Japanese, or Russian, do not> > > speak English or do not feel themselves confident enough in English. This> > > means that they get all the messages about WMF through their own wp> > > project (through the people who speak both languages, are involved somehow> > > on a broader scope, and just select the material to be translated). For> > > instance, there is no chance they can read this list, possibly they would> > > even never know that the (open) list exists. I just do not see how the> > > volunteer coordinator idea would work for these people. Unless, of course,> > > we find the translators - but then, again, this is not the only point> > > where translators are needed, and I just do not see how this could be> > > done. In the end of the day, participants of even bigger projects feel> > > disconnected from all decisions done at the WMF level, and do not feel> > > like they influenced these decisions at all.> > Very much so. The United Nations has from the beginning limited its> > list of official languages. Is the EU any better off if it translates> > long reports on narrowly focused topics from one obscure language into> > another? It may not be politically appealing for a Chechen to> > communicate in Russian, or for a Quechua to communicate in Spanish, but> > unless the speakers of those languages are able to provide translator> > services will remain limited. The most we can hope for is service in a> > limited number of widely used languages, or languages with a high> > on-line population like Japanese. Maltese may be official in the EU but> > we can't realistically do anything about that.> > Exactly. And that is why Transcom set the priorities between targeting> languages. Now we are going to make its annual and first update. I am> happy to invite you to review the current scheme.> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications_subcommittees/Trans/core_langs... > You are welcome to give an opinion or feedback of our activity on that talk.> > I set it mainly to determine which language translation should be> taken care to accomplish it with our limited resources (mainly> manpower and time). It works like as triage of medical staff in a> critical moment. We welcome all languages, but you may agree we need> to take first "major" languages on the project (like French) rather> than small languages (imagine if there are two unfinished translation> of Finnish and Spanish, not related to any specific regional concerns> and you can afford only five minutes, which language translator would> you like to seek for?).> > A slightly off-topic, as for Japanese I would love to add it has a> larger native speaking population than German or French according to> Ethnologue. (See also> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_languages_by_number_of_native_speakers#... > > > > -- > KIZU Naoko> http://d.hatena.ne.jp/Britty (in Japanese)> Quote of the Day (English): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/WQ:QOTD%3E > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 7> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:27:08 +0100> From: "effe iets anders" effeietsanders@gmail.com> Subject: [Foundation-l] Rewriting proposal of Stewards Policy to be> voted upon> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org, "List for Meta Wikimedia affairs"> wikimediameta-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Message-ID:> 73f3ff1b0801140027o23f451f7u33494f9021eb25c9@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1> > Dear all,> > As announced earlier, a vote will start on January 15, 00.00h UTC (in> roughly 15,5h) about the updating proposal of the Stewards Policy. For> the vote, please see [1] and for the proposal [2].> > Voting will be possible for two weeks (ending January 28, 23.59h UTC),> and a 66,7% majority is required. Anyone can vote provided that they> have a valid account on meta with a link to at least one user page on> a project where they participated in the project for at least three> months (not just edits to their own user page) - Counting January 15,> 2008 as date for calculations.> > Please pass this message on to your local community, so that everybody> who is interested in this policy can state his/her opinion on the> changes [3].> > Best regards,> > Lodewijk Gelauff / Effeietsanders> > [1]: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Rewriting/Stewards_policy/Vote%3E [2]: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Rewriting/Stewards_policy&a... [3]: http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta%3ARewriting%2FStewards_poli... > > > ------------------------------> > Message: 8> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:41:40 +0000> From: "Herby" herbythyme@fmail.co.uk> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] [Wikimediameta-l] Rewriting proposal of> Stewards Policy to be voted upon> To: "effe iets anders" effeietsanders@gmail.com, "Meta Wikimedia> affairs" wikimediameta-l@lists.wikimedia.org, "Wikimedia Foundation> Mailing List" foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org, "List for Meta> Wikimedia affairs" wikimediameta-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Cc: Larry Pieniazek lar@miltontrainworks.com> Message-ID: 1200300100.28849.1231075721@webmail.messagingengine.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"> > For clarification.> > This change in policy would appear to have removed annual confirmation> of stewards?> > Thanks> Herby> > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:27:08 +0100, "effe iets anders"> effeietsanders@gmail.com said:> > Dear all,> > > > As announced earlier, a vote will start on January 15, 00.00h UTC (in> > roughly 15,5h) about the updating proposal of the Stewards Policy. For> > the vote, please see [1] and for the proposal [2].> > > > Voting will be possible for two weeks (ending January 28, 23.59h UTC),> > and a 66,7% majority is required. Anyone can vote provided that they> > have a valid account on meta with a link to at least one user page on> > a project where they participated in the project for at least three> > months (not just edits to their own user page) - Counting January 15,> > 2008 as date for calculations.> > > > Please pass this message on to your local community, so that everybody> > who is interested in this policy can state his/her opinion on the> > changes [3].> > > > Best regards,> > > > Lodewijk Gelauff / Effeietsanders> > > > [1]: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Meta:Rewriting/Stewards_policy/Vote%3E > [2]:> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta:Rewriting/Stewards_policy&a... > [3]:> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Meta%3ARewriting%2FStewards_poli... > > > _______________________________________________> > Wikimediameta-l mailing list> > Wikimediameta-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediameta-l%3E -- > Herby> herbythyme@fmail.co.uk> > -- > http://www.fastmail.fm - Access your email from home and the web> > > > > ------------------------------> > _______________________________________________> foundation-l mailing list> foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l%3E > > End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 46, Issue 103> *********************************************

_________________________________________________________________ Connect to the next generation of MSN Messenger  http://imagine-msn.com/messenger/launch80/default.aspx?locale=en-us&sour...