Wikipedia-l November 2003

wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

71 participants
98 discussions

Re: [WikiFR-l] Hébergement_chez Ouvaton
by Anthere 09 Nov '03

09 Nov '03

> 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

2 2

Groningen: Wikipedia lecture
by Chuck Smith 09 Nov '03

09 Nov '03

> > 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

1 0

Re: [WikiFR-l] Read only mirror in Paris & French law non profitorganisation
by Anthere 09 Nov '03

09 Nov '03

--- "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

1 0

series of articles and navigation table
by Antoine 09 Nov '03

09 Nov '03

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.

1 0

European domains
by Jimmy Wales 07 Nov '03

07 Nov '03

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

3 2

www.wikipedia.de points to domain seller
by Daniel Mayer 05 Nov '03

05 Nov '03

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)

5 5

www.wikipedia.de points to domain seller
by Daniel Mayer 04 Nov '03

04 Nov '03

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)

4 3

www.wikipedia.de points to domain seller
by Elisabeth Bauer 03 Nov '03

03 Nov '03

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

2 1

[Wikilegal-l] Re: [Wikipedia-l] Public Library of Science GFDL Compatible
by Tomos at Wikipedia 03 Nov '03

03 Nov '03

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/legalcode http://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

6 6

Re: Public Library of Science GFDL Compatible
by Stephen Gilbert 03 Nov '03

03 Nov '03

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.

5 9

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Older →

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Wikipedia-l November 2003