> Anthere, pourquoi es-tu si n�gative ?
just as usual
to slow down hasty decisions
> Le Sunday 09 November 2003 17:33, Anthere a �crit :
> > > > > >Quelle est la proc�dure maintenant ?
> > > > >
> > > > > c'est nouveau pour nous, faut que je vois.
> on va
> > > > > faire �a vite.
> > > >
> > > > Pourquoi vite ? Ou est l urgence pr�cisemment
> ?
> > >
> > > En fait, Ouvaton avait pris cette d�cision il y
> a au
> > > moins une semaine d�j�,
> > > mais ils viennent seulement de m'en informer,
> apr�s
> > > que je les ai relanc�.
> >
> > Je ne vois toujours pas en quoi nous serions
> press�s
> > et n aurions pas le temps d en discuter
> > tranquillement, d un point de vue international.
>
> Mais je n'ai pas dit qu'il y avait urgence. C'est
> toi qui a interpr�t� les
> choses de cette fa�on.
Yann said "But I didnot say there was urgency. It is
you who interpretated things that way"
Sure Yann
In this mail,
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikifr-l/2003-November/000992.html
you write "c'est nouveau pour nous, faut que je vois.
on va faire �a vite."
->it is new to us, I have to consider this. We will
have to do this very quickly
And in this mail, you suggest the first assembly to
take place on the 22 nd of november, and that
meanwhile, we should agree on status, board and other
minor problems
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikifr-l/2003-November/000996.html
But undoubtely, it was just interpretation
> > Il ne me semble pas que nous ayons a suivre
> Ouvaton
> > dans leurs objectifs.
>
> ??? Que veux-tu dire ? Le seul objectif d'Ouvaton,
> c'est d'aider Wikip�dia.
> Faut arr�ter la parano.
Yann said that the only goal of Ouvaton was to help
Wikipedia, and that I was paranoid in saying we did
not have to be hasty just because Ouvaton had agreed
to host us (and could perhaps change their mind if we
took too much time)
I know very few commercial firms that would do things
for free. There is always an interest. In that case,
the adress being ouvaton.wikipedia.fr for example.
Do we want that ?
> > > Les serveurs de Ouvaton sont � Paris.
> > >
> > > > Et pour mon autre question : qui aura la
> > > > responsabilit� l�gale en cas de probl�me ?
> > >
> > > C'est une bonne question. ;o)
> > > Peut-on d�cider de qui aura la responsabilit�
> l�gale
> > > du miroir ?
> > > Je n'en sais rien. Perso, �a ne m'inqui�te pas
> > > tellement pour l'instant.
> >
> > moi oui.
> > Il y a du mat�riel sur fr qui ne respecte pas les
> lois
> > fran�aises
>
> Peux-tu pr�ciser ?
I said to Yann we had some material on the french
wikipedia that could be problematic with french law,
and that it could be eventually a problem.
He asked me to be more precise.
-> Fair use is not a doctrine recognised in France
> > > Je suis pr�t � prendre cette responsabilit� si
> > > n�cessaire.
> >
> > Tu as des connaissances l�gales ?
>
> J'ai l'exp�rience de g�rer des associations et du
> droit d'auteur, en
> particulier li� � Internet.
I asked Yann who would have legal responsability in
case of a problem (such as copyright issues). He said
he was ready to carry that responsability. I asked him
if he had legal knowledge. He answered he was
experienced in managing information, author rights, in
particular as related to Internet.
Fair use as well ?
> > Pour quelles raisons serait tu jug� responsable
> par la
> > loi d actions ill�gales commises par les autres ?
>
> C'est pour cela que le probl�me ne se pose pas pour
> l'instant.
> En particlier, pas dans les termes que tu sembles
> sugg�rer.
I asked why he would be as an individual responsible
for our legal issues. He answered there were no
problem right now.
> > > Le probl�me, c'est plut�t : que doit-on copier
> sur
> > > le miroir ?
> > > 1. Tout.
> > > 2. Uniquement les articles encyclop�diques.
> > > 3. Une selection des articles encyclop�diques.
> > > 4. ?
> >
> > la r�ponse est �vidente. A mes yeux. Une
> association
> > francaise est soumise a la loi francaise
> > si elle veut ne pas etre attaqu�e puis condamnee,
> elle
> > doit respecter la loi
>
> Tout � fait, mais ma question n'est pas li�e � un
> probl�me juridique, mais
> encyclop�dique.
He asked what would be copied on the miror,
everything, only encyclopedic articles, a selection of
encyclopedic articles
That is a good question :-)
Who would do the job of selecting the articles every
night ? :)
> > donc, nous ne pouvons pas y mettre tout.
> > Qui va s occuper de faire le tri ?
>
> Je propose des solutions en fonctions des
> informations que j'ai.
> Rien n'est d�cid�, en particulier, pour les
> questions techniques.
>
> > Mais pourquoi toute la communaut� a t elle a etre
> impliqu�e ?
>
> J'entends bien que c'est un projet de Wikip�dia, pas
> un projet personnel.
> C'est pourquoi il faut cr�er une association.
I asked why the whole community had to be involved in
a simple mirror setting ?
He said it was not a personal project and that was why
we had to create an association
I say that is why we have to talk about it before
creating an association
> > Oui. A ce propos, Jimbo appr�cierait qu'on lui
> parle
> > un peu de ce projet. Je pense qu'il serait pas mal
> que
> > Yann parle de ceci sur la
> wikipedia-l(a)wikipedia.org
>
> C'est fait. Brion est d�j� au courant car je lui ai
> demand� des infos
> techniques.
and what are the answers ? Brion ?
> > Wikipedia.org est un projet international. Commun.
> > Avec 40 langues diff�rentes. Pas un projet franco
> > fran�ais. Ce que tu es en train de proposer.
>
> Non, c'est simplement un miroir de la partie
> francophone.
I said that wikipedia was one project in several
languages, not several encyclopedia, and that what he
was suggesting was a french-french project (the server
will only host french wikipedia).
He answered that no, it was only a mirror of the
french wikipedia.
In this mail
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikifr-l/2003-November/001004.html
you specifically say that this is a temporary solution
before we set a read and write server
> > D'un point de vue technique, il me semble avoir
> > compris que la mise en place de pls serveurs
> poserait
> > plus de pb qu'il n'en r�soudrait.
>
> S'ils sont en lecture et �criture, oui. En lecture
> simple, non.
I said I understood that I understood there would be
more pb raised than pb solved by the proposition (I
personnnaly do not know)
He says, not if the server is read only.
But here In this mail
http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikifr-l/2003-November/001004.html
he says read is only temporary
what are the technical issues in both cases then ?
> > Je pense que ce que tu proposes est un RightToFork
>
> Non.
This should not need translation.
What is the argument ?
> > En bref, demain, plus besoin du serveur am�ricain
> > l'encyclop�die est franco-fran�aise et le reste du
> > projet ne nous importe plus.
>
> Anthere, peux-tu �tre POSITIVE de temps en temps ?
He says I should be positive sometimes :-)
He is right of course :-)))
> Je r�p�te si je n'ai pas �t� assez clair.
> J'ai fait des propositions. J'attends des
> contre-propositions. Pas des
> r�futations ou des blocages pour le plaisir.
He says he is doing propositions; he waits counter
propositions, not blocking just for pleasure
I apology Yann, but I do not do this for pleasure, but
out of interest and concern for the project. I think
any proposition should be dissected before being
accepted, and who would dissect your proposition but
me ? :-)
What I do is discussion, to reach consensus. That is
the way we do on Wikipedia. I see not where your
problem is with it.
> Yann
> - --
> http://www.non-violence.org/ | Site collaboratif sur
> la non-violence
> http://www.forget-me.net/ | Alternatives sur le Net
> http://fr.wikipedia.org/ | Encyclop�die libre
> http://www.forget-me.net/pro/ | Formations et
> services Linux
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
> > I just started on a direct translation of the
> > Esperanto brochure, but I'd like to point out that
> the
> > existing one is very out of date.
>
> I updated it a bit in July for the IJK, but the
> numbers are a little
> behind, and of course it's aimed specifically at the
> Esperanto-speaking
> audience. A literal translation would sound rather
> weird. :)
>
> Feel free to use it as a basis, of course.
Brion,
I'll be lecturing on Wikipedia in Groningen
(Netherlands) on December 13, so it would be nice if
it could be updated by then! :) This is the sixth
lecture I've given about Wikipedia in Esperanto... it
is getting a bit tiresome. ;-) Also, I have a list
of grammar corrections I need to send you. Hmmm...
I'll get around to that soon.
Thanks,
Chuck
=====
The Meatrix
http://www.themeatrix.com/
__________________________________________________________________
Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Logos und Klingeltöne fürs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de
--- "Alex T." <alex756(a)nyc.rr.com> wrote:
> Excuse me for writing this in English, but I don't
> have
> the time to try and work on writing it in French and
> I am responding to Anthere's post which was in
> English.
that is ok. This should be global discussion
> Perhaps Jimbo should be contacted as Wikimedia
> is the owner of all rights to the Wikipedia name,
> also the question of French copyright law is then
> compounded with American copyright law as there
> is simultaneous publication in both countries? Or
> will
> it be a mirror only, i.e. if you submit an edit on
> the
> French server it will first be recorded on the US
> server?
Initially, it will be so. Discussions are over the
frequency of database update. Perhaps every night. I
do not understand how we can really work on a
wikipedia, where edits are on en and reading on fr,
only updated once (or even more) a day. Does that mean
we have to edit a page to see its real content ?
> Otherwise a french not-for-profit that donates to
> the
> US not-for-profit and also supports a mirror might
> be a good way to get tax exempt status in the EU
> (though I am not in any way knowledgeable about
> tax implications in the EU), i.e. will a French
> organization
> that accept charitable donations also be charitable
> (and
> hence tax exempt) in Great Britain for example?
The association 1901 can not receive donations. It can
receive members fees (we can have members of honor I
guess to turn the problem). To be exempted itself, it
must ask specifically to be so and be granted to be
so.
That is very heavy afterwards because there are some
controls over how money is used; I know not who would
take care of these money issue, but my understanding
(from my Iaal sister and father-in law) is that it is
not to neglect
Or
> is
> it like the US, some application will need to be
> made in
> each tax jurisdiction? If there can be one
> recognized
> charity that has Wikipedia as a patron in the EU
> that would
> be good (and also convenient for sending donations
> to
> one central body). Of course an agreement would have
> to be worked out with Wikimedia Foundation (USA) and
> Fondation Wikimedia (France) to determine their
> respective
> rights and obligations.
>
> Alex T. Roshuk (Alex756) (IAAL but it's NALO!)
In short, this is not simple and I doubt it can be set
before the 22nd of november. That is all I say
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree
Hello,
I was reading the History of Germany articles and found the navigation
table on the right quite useful:
http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Germany
I think this will improve wikipedia just as much as the automatic table of
content did.
A way to implement this feature would be to point a parent article to all
it's childs and vice versa. That might be done using [[parent:articlename]]
and / or [[child:articlename]].
Let's look at an example:
History of Germany
-> Franks
-> Holy Roman Empire
-> German Confederation
-> German Empire
-> Weimar Republic
-> Nazi Germany
-> Germany since 1945
Franks article is interesting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franks) as it
is part of two series (History of France AND of Germany).
So the History of Germany will have:
[[child:Franks]]
And Franks will have:
[[parent:History of France]]
[[parent:History of Germany]]
Maybe we just need the parent tag ? Setting up a parent tag in an article
will automaticly update the parent article without using any child.
cheers,
--
Antoine
http://fr.wikipedia.org/
L'encyclopédie gratuite et libre.
An anonymous contributor has donated 200 EUR for European domains.
Normally I register via register.com, because I have been happy with
their 'automatic renewal' service, but with this wikipedia.de fiasco,
obviously that isn't a good enough reason.
So, I'm looking for advice on:
1. Cheap places to register the domains
2. Which domains we ought to register. Presumably we should
prioritize in order of popularity somehow?
Possibly some other eager patron would like to subsidize the purchase
of domains for another region of the world? (Pacific rim?)
--Jimbo
Kurt wrote:
>Indeed, this is really strange. Jimbo, how could this happen?
Because whoever registered wikipedia.de didn't renew the registration. AFAIK
wikipedia.de was never owned by nor ever an official Wikimedia domain name.
So its fate was in the hands of whoever registered it.
Wikimedia already has a whole bunch of domain names that have to be paid for
(and renewed). If we purchase wikipedia.de then to be fair then we would have
to do for every other wikipedia.xx where xx corresponds to country code that
is also a language code we use. That is a lot of domain names for Wikimedia
to pay for.
But there is nothing stopping individual Wikipedians from buying these domain
names and redirecting them to us. Just don't depend on that domain name
redirect working indefinitely.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Brion wrote:
>Various people are under the impression that Jimbo owned it,
>which is supported by a perusal of the list archives:
>
>http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/intlwiki-l/2002-June/000465.html
Well that changes everything (I missed that email). I don't agree with his
decision but what is done is done. Precedent has been set and now we will
have to pony up the money to reactivate wikipedia.de and also start to buy up
other country code wikipedia domains as well (prioritizing based on use/size
of the particular language versions).
Sigh. IMO that would be money better spent on hardware.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
Hello,
Some people on the German wikipedia noticed that http://www.wikipedia.de
points no longer to de.wikipedia.org but to a completely different site
which has a frappant similarity to a link farm.
What did happen here? Most people, reading about wikipedia in the
newspapers, first try the .de-adress. This could seriously damage our
reputation.
greetings,
elian
$ whois wikipedia.de
domain: wikipedia.de
descr: Thomas Dolezal
descr: Neustiftgasse 2
descr: A-2500 Baden
nserver: ns1.domainname.at
nserver: ns2.domainname.at
status: connect
changed: 20031101 152525
source: DENIC
[admin-c][tech-c][zone-c]
Type: PERSON
Name: Thomas Dolezal
Address: Langenlohe 11
City: Wiesenthau
Pcode: 91369
Country: DE
Phone: +49-162-5643392
Fax: +49-9191-163751
Email: thomas(a)webagentur.at
Remarks: td1
Changed: 20030823 000829
Source: DENIC
If I am not mistaken, the important part of CC licenses is that they are not
necessarily viral.
For example, CC-by (aka CC-Attribution license) allows the authors of
derivative works to change the license terms, as I understand. If you modify
the work, you should still make an attribution. But you do not have to
license that derivative work you created under the same (CC-By) license. You
can fully copyright it, or you can release it under GFDL.
CC-by-sa (CC-Attribution-Share Alike) is a different story. That is viral
and requires derivative works to be released under the same licenese. This,
I think is clear when one compares two license terms, especially the part
4-b.
And here are the links:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/legalcodehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0/legalcode
Sorry if I am mistaken. But if I'm right, you can create some derivative
work first, and you can release it under GFDL. I hope someone else can
double check the legal code on this point.
regards,
Tomos
_________________________________________________________________
See when your friends are online with MSN Messenger 6.0. Download it now
FREE! http://msnmessenger-download.com
Andre Engels wrote:
> As far as I know, this is not true. Creative Commons only allows spreading
> under the same license, not with more or less rights. Since the GNU/FDL is
> not the same license, it is not allowed to go from CC to GNU/FDL - or vice
> versa.
>
> I'd love it if someone proved me wrong, and either showed that there is a
> loophole (intended or unintended) that can be used and/or could get the
> "those licenses require basically the same things but in different wording,
> so no harm is done by cross-licensing" argument into something that would
> be juridically valid.
There is not single "Creative Commons" license. The project allows you
to pick the attributes you want, and then gives you a license that
covers them. In the case of the PLoF, they have only chosen to require
attribution. A summary of their license is here:
http://www.plos.org/journals/license . It allows modifications for any
purpose, and since they have not opted for a copyleft clause, derivative
works can be released under any license, including the GFDL.
That said, we still probably won't be able to include much. PLoS
publishes journals, and journals publish new research. As an
encyclopedia, it is beyond our scope to publish research that has not
yet gone through extensive peer review.
Stephen G.