but this http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ) is disturbing. It's a conspiracy pit of nutjobs. There's full fledged copyright violations of entire articles from newspapers ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Nini_and_Nunu ) publishing of names, addresses and occasional phone numbers of private citizens who stand as electors ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_(2008) ) and a cut and paste copy of an article on wikiquote ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/William_Blackstone ). Theres also the issue that the what can I do to help? page uses "SOVERIGN" in all caps and quotes like that, which is a tax protestor myth, being if they use that in court documents they are "soverign citizens" and the judges dont have jurisdiction over them.
Somebody might want to do something about this.
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
but this http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ) is disturbing. It's a conspiracy pit of nutjobs. There's full fledged copyright violations of entire articles from newspapers ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Nini_and_Nunu ) publishing of names, addresses and occasional phone numbers of private citizens who stand as electors ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_(2008)http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29) and a cut and paste copy of an article on wikiquote ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/William_Blackstone ). Theres also the issue that the what can I do to help? page uses "SOVERIGN" in all caps and quotes like that, which is a tax protestor myth, being if they use that in court documents they are "soverign citizens" and the judges dont have jurisdiction over them.
Somebody might want to do something about this.
-- -Brock
Just to clarify a little, these are the obama is a british citizen and cant be president people.
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
but this http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ) is disturbing. It's a conspiracy pit of nutjobs. There's full fledged copyright violations of entire articles from newspapers ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Nini_and_Nunu ) publishing of names, addresses and occasional phone numbers of private citizens who stand as electors ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_(2008)http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29) and a cut and paste copy of an article on wikiquote (
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/William_Blackstone ). Theres also
the
issue that the what can I do to help? page uses "SOVERIGN" in all caps
and
quotes like that, which is a tax protestor myth, being if they use that
in
court documents they are "soverign citizens" and the judges dont have jurisdiction over them.
Somebody might want to do something about this.
-- -Brock
Just to clarify a little, these are the obama is a british citizen and cant be president people.
-- -Brock _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Other than a takedown notice for the copy+paste violation (which the original authors would have to do), this doesn't really involve the Foundation. You're better off contacting Wikia for this.
-Chad
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
but this http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ) is disturbing. It's a conspiracy pit of nutjobs. There's full fledged copyright violations of entire articles from newspapers ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Nini_and_Nunu ) publishing of
names,
addresses and occasional phone numbers of private citizens who stand as electors (
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_(2008)http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29 http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29) and
a
cut and paste copy of an article on wikiquote (
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/William_Blackstone ). Theres also
the
issue that the what can I do to help? page uses "SOVERIGN" in all caps
and
quotes like that, which is a tax protestor myth, being if they use that
in
court documents they are "soverign citizens" and the judges dont have jurisdiction over them.
Somebody might want to do something about this.
-- -Brock
Just to clarify a little, these are the obama is a british citizen and
cant
be president people.
-- -Brock _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Other than a takedown notice for the copy+paste violation (which the original authors would have to do), this doesn't really involve the Foundation. You're better off contacting Wikia for this.
-Chad
I don't care if its up or down, i was just wondering if we're still connected to wikia in anyway (ie it reflect badly on us). If we're not, as it seems by your response, then I really don't care too much :)
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
I don't care if its up or down, i was just wondering if we're still connected to wikia in anyway (ie it reflect badly on us). If we're not, as it seems by your response, then I really don't care too much :)
There's no official connection between Wikimedia and Wikia. Jimbo Wales is in the board of both, and they are using Mediawiki software, that's as far as I know where the connection ends.
As far as I am aware (but someone staff should be able to clarify more in-depth), the only connection is Jimmy who has two hats on his head (director? at Wikia and board member at WMF), and no official ties. And Wikia sponsors (still?) Wikimania of course! But no offices are shared any more.
Anyway, it doesn't really matter. There is enough bad reflection of our own if people really search, so don't worry :)
Lodewijk
2009/1/3 Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 3:50 AM, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 6:43 AM, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 3:41 AM, Brock Weller brock.weller@gmail.com wrote:
but this http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Overview ) is disturbing. It's a conspiracy pit of nutjobs. There's full fledged copyright violations
of
entire articles from newspapers ( http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/Nini_and_Nunu ) publishing of
names,
addresses and occasional phone numbers of private citizens who stand
as
electors (
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_(2008)http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/New_York_Electors_%282008%29)
and
a
cut and paste copy of an article on wikiquote (
http://saveourrights.wikia.com/wiki/William_Blackstone ). Theres
also
the
issue that the what can I do to help? page uses "SOVERIGN" in all
caps
and
quotes like that, which is a tax protestor myth, being if they use
that
in
court documents they are "soverign citizens" and the judges dont have jurisdiction over them.
Somebody might want to do something about this.
-- -Brock
Just to clarify a little, these are the obama is a british citizen and
cant
be president people.
-- -Brock _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Other than a takedown notice for the copy+paste violation (which the original authors would have to do), this doesn't really involve the Foundation. You're better off contacting Wikia for this.
-Chad
I don't care if its up or down, i was just wondering if we're still connected to wikia in anyway (ie it reflect badly on us). If we're not, as it seems by your response, then I really don't care too much :)
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
-- -Brock _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Brock Weller wrote:
I don't care if its up or down, i was just wondering if we're still connected to wikia in anyway (ie it reflect badly on us). If we're not, as it seems by your response, then I really don't care too much :)
There's a bit on that here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikia#Wikia_and_the_Wikimedia_Foundation
The short of it is that there's no official connection, but perhaps more entanglement than would be ideal, though the level of entanglement has been decreasing.
-Mark
Please note that that part is quite outdated. As was my remark apperently btw, I understand that there have been changes since :)
Anyway, ask staff :P
Lodewijk
2009/1/4 Delirium delirium@hackish.org:
Brock Weller wrote:
I don't care if its up or down, i was just wondering if we're still connected to wikia in anyway (ie it reflect badly on us). If we're not, as it seems by your response, then I really don't care too much :)
There's a bit on that here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikia#Wikia_and_the_Wikimedia_Foundation
The short of it is that there's no official connection, but perhaps more entanglement than would be ideal, though the level of entanglement has been decreasing.
-Mark
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Brock Weller wrote:
Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...
What do you mean "still"? Wikimedia has never been linked with Wikia to the extent where this topic might be relevant on foundation-l. It's no more relevant than Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists or Answers.com.
What Wikimedia's volunteers do outside of Wikimedia is their own business.
-- Tim Starling
I don't think this is entirely accurate. For instance, there was the annual report several months ago noting that we had shared some office space with them. That was relevant to this list.
-Dan On Jan 4, 2009, at 7:53 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
Brock Weller wrote:
Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...
What do you mean "still"? Wikimedia has never been linked with Wikia to the extent where this topic might be relevant on foundation-l. It's no more relevant than Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists or Answers.com.
What Wikimedia's volunteers do outside of Wikimedia is their own business.
-- Tim Starling
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
But was that connection close enough (even in the old days) to complain here about copyright violations there? I think Tim had a good point here :P
Lodewijk
2009/1/5 Dan Rosenthal swatjester@gmail.com:
I don't think this is entirely accurate. For instance, there was the annual report several months ago noting that we had shared some office space with them. That was relevant to this list.
-Dan On Jan 4, 2009, at 7:53 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
Brock Weller wrote:
Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...
What do you mean "still"? Wikimedia has never been linked with Wikia to the extent where this topic might be relevant on foundation-l. It's no more relevant than Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists or Answers.com.
What Wikimedia's volunteers do outside of Wikimedia is their own business.
-- Tim Starling
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
On 1/4/09 5:19 PM, effe iets anders wrote:
But was that connection close enough (even in the old days) to complain here about copyright violations there? I think Tim had a good point here :P
*nod*
The Wikimedia Foundation is not, and has never been, involved with Wikia in a capacity which would make foundation-l an appropriate place to report a complaint about content on one of Wikia's thousands of user-created wiki sites. You should contact Wikia's admins directly if you want such a problem taken care of.
If one is instead making the argument that Wikimedia should distance itself from a wiki hosting company due to offense taken at user-created content on a site hosted by that company, well that's probably not the best argument but I guess you can freely make it here. :)
The relationship between WMF and Wikia is basically on the order of "some of the same people are involved" [many fewer now than before], "much of the same technology is involved" [still true], and "because of the above, occasionally both companies find it convenient to share resources" [mainly our techs talk to each other, and sometimes we'll split spare capacity on some physical resource at a fair market rate].
This is not a particularly closer relationship than we have with other companies and organizations in the fields of wikis and open source/content stuff.
-- brion
Brion Vibber wrote:
The relationship between WMF and Wikia is basically on the order of "some of the same people are involved" [many fewer now than before], "much of the same technology is involved" [still true], and "because of the above, occasionally both companies find it convenient to share resources" [mainly our techs talk to each other, and sometimes we'll split spare capacity on some physical resource at a fair market rate].
This is not a particularly closer relationship than we have with other companies and organizations in the fields of wikis and open source/content stuff.
-- brion
That is accurate in the absolute, but misleading in fact.
The relationship is markedly different from the other companies and organizations in the fields of wikis and open source/content stuff; in that many (I certainly hope not most) of the people at Wikia used to be integral and even core people at wikipedia - and no, I won't name names. Nuff said.
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen
Tim Starling wrote:
Brock Weller wrote:
Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...
What do you mean "still"? Wikimedia has never been linked with Wikia to the extent where this topic might be relevant on foundation-l. It's no more relevant than Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists or Answers.com.
What Wikimedia's volunteers do outside of Wikimedia is their own business.
I'm pretty sure Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists, and Answers.com have never been widely confused with Wikimedia to the extent that multiple news articles referred to them as the "commercial counterpart" to Wikipedia. They also did not share office space or bandwidth with Wikimedia, or have debts to Wikimedia mentioned in independent financial audits. They also did not use advertising slogans that made prominent use of the Wikipedia trademark and implied a relationship, such as Wikia's former slogan, "Wikipedia is the Encyclopedia. Wikia is the rest of the library."
-Mark
Delirium wrote:
Tim Starling wrote:
Brock Weller wrote:
Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...
What do you mean "still"? Wikimedia has never been linked with Wikia to the extent where this topic might be relevant on foundation-l. It's no more relevant than Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists or Answers.com.
What Wikimedia's volunteers do outside of Wikimedia is their own business.
I'm pretty sure Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists, and Answers.com have never been widely confused with Wikimedia to the extent that multiple news articles referred to them as the "commercial counterpart" to Wikipedia. > They also did not share office space or bandwidth with Wikimedia, or have debts to Wikimedia mentioned in independent financial audits. They also did not use advertising slogans that made prominent use of the Wikipedia trademark and implied a relationship, such as Wikia's former slogan, "Wikipedia is the Encyclopedia. Wikia is the rest of the library."
I'm not seeing anything in that rant that contradicts the point I was making. They might be different to Wikitravel in other ways, but they are the same in terms of the lack of relevance of a content-related complaint to foundation-l.
-- Tim Starling
Tim Starling wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Tim Starling wrote:
Brock Weller wrote:
Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...
What do you mean "still"? Wikimedia has never been linked with Wikia to the extent where this topic might be relevant on foundation-l. It's no more relevant than Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists or Answers.com.
What Wikimedia's volunteers do outside of Wikimedia is their own business.
I'm pretty sure Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists, and Answers.com have never been widely confused with Wikimedia to the extent that multiple news articles referred to them as the "commercial counterpart" to Wikipedia. > They also did not share office space or bandwidth with Wikimedia, or have debts to Wikimedia mentioned in independent financial audits. They also did not use advertising slogans that made prominent use of the Wikipedia trademark and implied a relationship, such as Wikia's former slogan, "Wikipedia is the Encyclopedia. Wikia is the rest of the library."
I'm not seeing anything in that rant that contradicts the point I was making. They might be different to Wikitravel in other ways, but they are the same in terms of the lack of relevance of a content-related complaint to foundation-l.
The point I was making is that the fact that people thought a content-related complaint about Wikia might be relevant to the foundation is the fault primarily of Wikia and the Foundation, and especially its entangled principals, not the fault of a newbie complainer who was misled by the association.
Given your conflict of interest in this matter, you are also not particularly well positioned to comment.
-Mark
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
The point I was making is that the fact that people thought a content-related complaint about Wikia might be relevant to the foundation is the fault primarily of Wikia and the Foundation, and especially its entangled principals, not the fault of a newbie complainer who was misled by the association.
Given your conflict of interest in this matter, you are also not particularly well positioned to comment.
I have no conflict of interest (unless having an account in Wikia counts) and I agree with everything Tim said. Complaints about Wikia content are irrelevant to Foundation-l, unless the point is something like that Wikimedia should distance itself from Wikia more because one of their wikis is used by a bunch of nutjobs who furthermore take an attitude toward copyright less like Wikipedia and more like every other website in existence. If *that* was the point, it's a pretty poor one still, and even more poorly expressed.
Hoi, I have no involvement in Wikia, I am quite happy to say "poppycock" to you.
When the WMF has good relations with many organisations, I would credit the WMF positively for this. Cooperation is very much what Wikis are about or should be about. Given that it has been explicitly said that cooperation between these organisations is on a sound economic and practical basis, I welcome it when WMF, Wikia, Wikihow, Wikiwhoever have close links. Thanks. GerardM
2009/1/6 Delirium delirium@hackish.org
Tim Starling wrote:
Delirium wrote:
Tim Starling wrote:
Brock Weller wrote:
Don't know how linked we still are with wikia...
What do you mean "still"? Wikimedia has never been linked with Wikia to the extent where this topic might be relevant on foundation-l. It's no more relevant than Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists or Answers.com.
What Wikimedia's volunteers do outside of Wikimedia is their own
business.
I'm pretty sure Wikitravel, Jimmy's objectivist mailing lists, and Answers.com have never been widely confused with Wikimedia to the extent that multiple news articles referred to them as the "commercial counterpart" to Wikipedia. > They also did not share office space or bandwidth with Wikimedia, or have debts to Wikimedia mentioned in independent financial audits. They also did not use advertising slogans that made prominent use of the Wikipedia trademark and implied a relationship, such as Wikia's former slogan, "Wikipedia is the Encyclopedia. Wikia is the rest of the library."
I'm not seeing anything in that rant that contradicts the point I was making. They might be different to Wikitravel in other ways, but they are the same in terms of the lack of relevance of a content-related complaint to foundation-l.
The point I was making is that the fact that people thought a content-related complaint about Wikia might be relevant to the foundation is the fault primarily of Wikia and the Foundation, and especially its entangled principals, not the fault of a newbie complainer who was misled by the association.
Given your conflict of interest in this matter, you are also not particularly well positioned to comment.
-Mark
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Delirium wrote:
Tim Starling wrote:
They might be different to Wikitravel in other ways, but they are the same in terms of the lack of relevance of a content-related complaint to foundation-l.
The point I was making is that the fact that people thought a content-related complaint about Wikia might be relevant to the foundation is the fault primarily of Wikia and the Foundation, and especially its entangled principals, not the fault of a newbie complainer who was misled by the association.
Given your conflict of interest in this matter, you are also not particularly well positioned to comment.
Even supposing Tim has a "conflict of interest", that's a misunderstanding of the limitations such a conflict should create. Interested parties are and should always be in a position to comment on subjects that are open for discussion. A conflict of interest might lead to a restriction on their ability to make decisions which affect that interest, but not on their ability to comment. For the same reason, people with a personal stake in Wikipedia articles usually shouldn't edit those articles, but should always be free to post on talk pages so long as they abide by our basic standards of behavior.
--Michael Snow
Delirium wrote:
Tim Starling wrote:
I'm not seeing anything in that rant that contradicts the point I was making. They might be different to Wikitravel in other ways, but they are the same in terms of the lack of relevance of a content-related complaint to foundation-l.
The point I was making is that the fact that people thought a content-related complaint about Wikia might be relevant to the foundation is the fault primarily of Wikia and the Foundation, and especially its entangled principals, not the fault of a newbie complainer who was misled by the association.
A fair point, and I'm glad you finally made it. But I was only trying to correct an error in the original post which had not been pointed out by the previous replies, it wasn't my intention to lay blame.
Given your conflict of interest in this matter, you are also not particularly well positioned to comment.
I think I'm entitled to comment regardless of who I am, but you can to ask me to state my interests to the list. I am a Wikimedia employee, and my wife is a cofounder, employee and stockholder of Wikia.
-- Tim Starling
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 1:42 PM, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
not the fault of a newbie complainer who was misled by the association.
Let's not categorize him negatively. We have no idea if he is a "newbie" or not, he was "old" enough to realize that they weren't really connected (evidenced by his subject line: "don't know *how* linked we *still* are with Wikia"; emphasis added). However, he knew that we knew people at Wikia (even if we weren't connected) and could find someone to contact, whereas he didn't know he can just e-mail community [at] wikia.com. (Which Angela did, by the way, a few days ago.)
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org