Wikipedia-l October 2004

wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

70 participants
75 discussions

Re: [Free-sklyarov-uk] Dutch Parliament public domain images and public broadcasters
by David Gerard 22 Oct '04

22 Oct '04

Seen on UK-CDR. Could our Dutch readers please advise us on how and when this wonderful thing will eventuate? - d. Andrew A. Adams wrote: >>From BNA's Internet Law News: > > > DUTCH PARLIAMENTARIANS TO PUSH FOR INCREASED PUBLIC DOMAIN > Parliamentarians from Dutch ruling and opposition parties > unanimously agreed that most images currently owned by Dutch > public broadcasters should be released into the public > domain and allowed to be distributed online. > <http://www.dmeurope.com/default.asp?ArticleID=3911> > >

2 1

Could a developer kindly update the MediaWiki namespace on some projects?
by Peter Gervai 21 Oct '04

21 Oct '04

Hello, I realised that lots of new projects in my language (hungarian) started recently, which is great. My problem is that they use a very old version of interface texts (either LanguageHU.php or MediaWiki, I cannot tell which is used). I would like to request two things: 1) Is it possible to update them by using hu.wikipedia.org's MediaWiki texts? (They would need a search&replace on "wikipedia" to the project name like "wikibooks", "wikiquote", etc., but in that case I would like to request more differences, so please contact me before the _replace_. Copy is appreciated though no matter whether s&r possible.) 2) What can I do to make new appearing projects to use the current interface texts in the future? thanks, Peter [[user:grin]] everywhere around en, hu, meta.

1 0

Re: On press releases and boasting
by Michael Snow 21 Oct '04

21 Oct '04

Sj wrote: >On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 17:41:43 +0200, Elisabeth Bauer <elian(a)djini.de> wrote: > > >>Daniel Mayer wrote: >> >> >>>Two words: PRESS RELEASE! >>> >>>Seriously, once the fund drive is over we should have a press release about >>>this and also mention the fact and result of our 'recent successful fund >>>drive.' We should also quote Jimbo when he said that commercial encyclopedias >>>will be out of business in 5 years if they keep doing as they have been. >>> >>> >>I'm not entirely sure if it's a good idea to send a separate press >>release. We discussed this yesterday among the german wikipedians, >>feelings were mixed. >> >> >Well, it would be combined with other notices for the coming week. >But this professional content test (and it would not be a bad idea to >commission more of the same) is more newsworthy than the >successful completion of our fundraiser. > On this one, I agree with Elian. I doubt that a press release of this nature would have much impact because we haven't done anything worth mentioning (completing the fundraiser precipitated by our last press release doesn't qualify), this is something somebody else did. The best time to send a press release is when *we ourselves* have done something newsworthy. And if the wikipedians on de: are skeptical about the value of a press release here, when the test relates specifically to them, I think that's a pretty good indication for the rest of us. An alternative idea might be to play this up as part of a rollout for whatever new quality control system we develop - as in "Look how good we already are, now we're getting better". By the way, as we wrap up the fundraiser portion, let me take this opportunity to again thank everyone who worked on the last press release. There are too many names to list, and some weren't logged in anyway, but to anyone who helped write, translate, or distribute the press release - Great work! I think the resulting press coverage has been about as good as we could have hoped for, as the 1,000,000-article milestone got mentioned on numerous websites and in quite a few print newspapers and magazines, including a widely reprinted AP story. While I don't understand every language, I was able to decipher that the coverage spread across quite a few different languages, which is even better. And now, time to get back to work on improving the encyclopedia, so that this amounts to more than just our 15 minutes of fame. --Michael Snow

8 9

Wikimania 2005
by Anthere 19 Oct '04

19 Oct '04

Hi To help organisers, it would be best that those interested in participating mention their name here : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania%3AParticipants Naturally, this is not "registration", but it will provide useful information to make decisions upon accomodation, size of rooms etc... Please, also mention the cities in which you would come (in comparison to those you would not - in case this makes a huge difference :-)), and mostly, indicate periods preferences. Thanks for the organisers. PS : We'll set into place an multilingual information network asap, but right now errr... let's manage with bits of boxes and string. Help in all committees is welcome :-) anthere _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com

1 0

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Re: [Wikitech-l] Hyperlink convention
by modean52＠comcast.net 19 Oct '04

19 Oct '04

True. In American English, a list of 3 items is usually "bacon, eggs, and cheese" - not "bacon, eggs and cheese." The later implies a connection between the items, but the former doesn't. James -------------- Original message -------------- > e2m wrote: > > Why this resource is not used to deal with the differences of the type > > "behaviour" and "behavior" or "center" and "centre"? > > One reason is that the differences between American and British > English are more involved than simply changing the spelling of a few > words. Punctuation and grammar are also involved. If you changed > behavior to behaviour in an otherwise AE sentence, the sentence would > then be wrong in both languages. See > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_and_British_English_differences > > Angela. > _______________________________________________ > Wikipedia-l mailing list > Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

18 39

[elian@djini.de: [Foundation-l] wikimedia conference, round two]
by Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales 19 Oct '04

19 Oct '04

I just wanted to make sure that this gets the widest possible distribution. I'm not sure if announcements have been made in other languages, but hopefully this conference will be widely discussed in all languages. It's going to be amazing! Start saving your money now, no one should miss it. :-) ----- Forwarded message from Elisabeth Bauer <elian(a)djini.de> ----- From: Elisabeth Bauer <elian(a)djini.de> Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 22:48:36 +0200 To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org> Subject: [Foundation-l] wikimedia conference, round two Hello, a short report from the meeting on IRC yesterday. After a semi-public question & answers session about the candidates we discussed the different opportunities among the committee members. It became we clear that we need detailed plans as a basis for the final decision, but to save the participants unnecessary work, we decided to narrow down the list to three candidates which appeared the most promising to us: Dublin, Frankfurt and Rotterdam. It was hard (and very sad :-(, for my part) to sort out the Eastern European cities, main reasons for this decision were that there are not enough local people to help and the difficult travel situation for people from overseas even when the offers looked very beautiful. The final city will be chosen in two weeks from now. The rest of the meeting was about organization in general: we'll divide the work up in different teams. Below is the first draft with the fields and the people who volunteered for each job. If you'd like to help in a certain field, please contact these people: * conference program (Angela) * sponsorships (Jimbo) * finances (Oscar) * PR (N.N.) * social activities (Danny) * information in the projects (Anthere) * website & registration (Brion) * technics (local) greetings, elian _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l(a)wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l ----- End forwarded message ----- -- "La nÃ¨fle est un fruit." - first words of 50,000th article on fr.wikipedia.org

1 0

Wikipedia on Volokh Conspiracy
by Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales 19 Oct '04

19 Oct '04

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2004_10_14.shtml#1098119066 I'll be blogging about this in the morning, but I did want to say that I think Orin Kerr is right about this particular entry, but wrong about how wikipedia works and the degree of commitment that the community has to getting it right. In particular, I think he's wrong about this part: >If I understand accurately how Wikipedia works -- a big 'if,' I should >point out -- my views of what is in the Patriot Act are no more and no >less valued by Wikipedia than the views of any other Internet user. About this, I very much think he's wrong. Certainly I am not aware of any serious support for this kind of wholesale intellectual relativism in any wikipedia discussions. Instead, there's always an underlying and thorough commitment to _getting it right_. I do wonder how, in the long run, we will deal more effectively with the kind of POV warrioring that leads to entries like this one... where politically motivated hysteria leads to blatant factual errors. --Jimbo

1 0

timeouts
by NSK 18 Oct '04

18 Oct '04

I get timeouts on wikipedia Is the server down? -- NSK Admin of http://portal.wikinerds.org Project Manager of http://www.nerdypc.org Project Manager of http://www.adapedia.org Project Manager of http://maatworks.wikinerds.org

1 0

Re: Image tarball
by Andy Rabagliati 18 Oct '04

18 Oct '04

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Tim Starling wrote: > Hi, > > This is just a one-off thing at the moment, I haven't set up scripts to > do it on a regular basis. So if I forget, please remind me. I've made a > tarball of all the images from the English Wikipedia. See the bottom of: > > http://download.wikimedia.org/ > > I had a quick discussion on IRC about the wording of the legal > statement, it seems we can't really be sure that it's legal to do > anything at all with them. It's an unsatisfactory situation, in my > opinion, but there you have it. So the disclaimer says "use at your own > risk". Folks, Just to keep you up to date, we have had great success with wikipedia installations in schools in South Africa. I use these images for the install. I have downloaded more recent database snapshots to match with it, but for the most part if they cannot make a difference by reposting changes (which they cannot, as it is quite isolated in bandwidth-space) I just put a June snapshot (same date as the pictures) on. I am excited by the potential of carrying snapshots and image diffs, probably selected by tar using the file dates. We (Wizzy Digital Courier) can carry these by UUCP - using dialup connections or physical carrying on a USB memory stick. I split them up into 6 CDs, but found that one whole CD was the thumb/ directory , so you can skip that :-) I would also love to preserve the 'newsy' feel of the front page. I had a suggestion fron Sj that I grab the front page conventionally and patch the URLs to point to a local wikipedia installation. If you could put up a tarball of the whole archive again I can rsync it this way. Or - put up an rsync server ? That would also handle deletion of orphaned images. Cheers, Andy! http://wizzy.org.za/ (not been updated in a while) http://www.slug.org.za/ (Shuttleworth Foundation project putting Open Source into schools)

6 9

Anglo-Saxon wiki
by modean52＠comcast.net 18 Oct '04

18 Oct '04

The Anglo-Saxon wiki is up (thanks Tim, Angela!). I was wondering, how do I go about getting it on the statistics pages, and on the other languages' links? We already have 7 users so far! Thanks, James

4 4

Tracking Wikipedia growth
by Michael Snow 17 Oct '04

17 Oct '04

For those of you that are interested in this subject, here's a report that has Wikipedia as the 4th-fastest-growing website in the US for the month of September, in terms of unique visitors. http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041015/cgf040_1.html A lot of the growth is driven by students doing school research; Britannica ranked as the 9th-fastest-growing for the same time period. We're growing faster than they are, both in percentage terms and in raw numbers, but they're still ahead overall. --Michael Snow

2 1

Wikinews license
by Anthony DiPierro 17 Oct '04

17 Oct '04

> A GNU FDL / cc-by-sa dual licensing scheme could be used for Wikinews... But > this would eliminate the option of re-incorporating third party improvements > back into Wikinews and would also make it impractical to incorporate Wikipedia > content into Wikinews for background content (since in both cases the third > party/Wikipedia users would have to agree to dual-license their work). So what > we really need is GNU FDL and cc-by-sa compatibility ASAP. > -- mav One advantage we have with Wikinews is that the number of authors and edit history of a typical Wikinews article is likely to be *much* smaller than a typical Wikipedia article. Perhaps a solution could work where all articles are GFDL (for the sake of allowing a reuser to use a single license), but individual articles can be dual (tri-, quad-, ...) licensed as determined by the initial author. Alternatively, we could just have some standard for contributors to specify that their content is dual licensed under <<whatever>>, and let reusers sort out the edit history. We could specify that edits marked "minor" are released into the public domain, and if we wanted we could even require anonymous edits to be public domain. There's a lot we can do with Wikinews that we can't do with Wikipedia, due to the nature of the articles as well as historical problems with Wikipedia. I think we should really think about this before we launch Wikinews. Hopefully a future version of the GFDL will be much more lenient, but we can't rely on that. Anthony

1 0

Articles that might draw fire.
by Omri Schwarz 17 Oct '04

17 Oct '04

Hi, folks. I and some friends have been discussing the issue of whether 10 years from now it will become important for your average corporate manager not to do anything that might wind up being documented in his company's Wikipedia entry. A brief look through Wikipedia does show articles detailing the controversial actions of some corporations, but not enough to indicate a concerted effort by any corporate history geeks or labor history geeks. Said friends reached the conclusion that the addition of many articles on corporate history and ongoing activities would be a good thing indeed, but a concerted effort to do so would be obnoxious, since it increases the chance of Wikipedia facing disruptive efforts (in the form of legal threats or revert-wars conducted by paid minions). It would be a good thing since a wiki is not time indexed, like any press article, and cannot just be "ridden out." But before any effort is made to write articles on corporate activities, it would be good to come here and ask whether possibly controversial articles are wellcome in Wikipedia, or whether a fork of the project would be a better thing to do. So, what do y'all think? Thanks for your attention, Omri Schwarz

7 7

Formal request: Wikinews project
by Anthony DiPierro 17 Oct '04

17 Oct '04

I'm skeptical about how well suited a wiki is to original research. But I think it's extremely well suited to news summaries, a la Slashdot. Since there isn't really anything out there to do this, I think this will quickly become a huge success just for the news summaries. Maybe it'll work for original news reporting too, I think the current proposals on how to run things are necessary changes to the wiki model which are necessary for it to have a chance. I do have a couple comments though. "These stories will then undergo systematic review for another period of time, in which the editors try to find consensus." I'm not sure it's reasonable to require consensus support for publication. I'd rather see a requirement that two or three accredited editors support an article, and they can be named somewhere in the article. Then, as long as there isn't a majority of opposition to the article, the article can stay. In theory there will be many more news articles in Wikinews than there are encyclopedia articles in Wikipedia. That's just the nature of news. I don't think it's reasonable to expect every news article to be a collaborative work of all editors. That's just not scalable. This is a fundamental difference between Wikinews and Wikipedia, and it needs to be addressed. GFDL There was talk about the impact Wikinews would have on Wikipedia, and a comment was made that Wikipedia will naturally copy Wikinews content where appropriate. But if Wikinews is GFDL, this isn't as simple as using copy and paste. It would be best if Wikinews contributors were asked to give permission for this from the beginning. This might take the form of "contributions made to Wikinews may be included in a derivative GFDL work so long as that work gives credit to the original author." Even this becomes problematic when copying news stories with multiple authors, but it's better than having to adhere to the details of the GFDL regarding history sections and title pages etc. Note that the tempting solution of just using a different license altogether is probably not a good one, because Wikinews stories will likely benefit greatly from being able to include introductory text from Wikipedia, even if that does mean they then have to include a byline and history section mentioning the Wikipedia author(s). Copies from VOANews and other PD sources? One thing I'd like to do in Wikinews is copy some stories from PD sources such as VOANews.com and edit them. This doesn't seem to fall under "summaries from external sources", but I don't think I should be required to be an accredited editor to do this. I'd like to see it clarified that this falls under the types of news stories anonymous editors can create. Anthony

1 0

Open Mapping
by Anthony DiPierro 17 Oct '04

17 Oct '04

Daniel Mayer wrote: > The real issue are data; Only the U.S. has very comprehensive public domin > spatial data. The most comprehensive public domain spatial data is probably on the US, but there is an awful lot of it on the rest of the world too. I've been working recently with "VMAP Level 0" data, which is a 1.8 gig collection of worldwide GIS data at a 1:1,000,000 scale. Yes, the scale is poor compared with US data, but it's a good start. Additionally, if the project was able to get a little bit of funding, there is a whole bunch more worldwide data available through the Freedom of Information Act. All you have to do is pay the FOIA copying fee for the CDs and the data itself is public domain. > A separate WikiGIS/WikiMaps project (we own the .com and .org for > both names) would probably be needed to improve those data and create data for > the rest of the world (also serve the result to all Wikimedia projects as a > part of Wikimedia Commons). *That* would be fairly unique and difficult to do, > since I'm not aware of any such similar project based on the Internet. I'm strongly in favor of this. In fact, I've registered wikiteer.org and have already begun working on it. I was planning on completing a prototype before really pushing for support from Wikimedia, but if people are interested maybe we should get started right away. > " the whole idea of copyrights on spatial data seem to be absurd to me; how > could anybody claim to *own* any exact digital reproduction of the street > network for Paris or the exact location and shape of the Zaire River? " While I agree with your sentiment (I don't even think software should be copyrightable), the digital reproduction is by no means exact. As such, a large number of choices have to be made, both in terms of selection and in terms of how to most accurately reproduce the data. In this sense it's no more absurd than a copyright on a digital photo of a paris street. Anthony

1 0

Open Mapping
by Anthony DiPierro 17 Oct '04

17 Oct '04

1 0

de:Wikipedia edges out Britannica (among others)
by Sj 16 Oct '04

16 Oct '04

The de: Wikipedia recently underwent its second professional content test, this time overseen by Die Zeit, Germany's leading weekly newspaper. And friends, this "popular dispenser of knowledge on the Internet", this "desert of text", is HOT. While it is "completely without [multi]media" and "does not support complex search queries", it "stands in first place when it comes to text content," receiving top aggregate marks in three broad content categories -- Natural Science and Technology, Humanities and Social Science, and Culture -- matched only by Encarta Professional. Moreover, its "lead in current events is a mile wide". This review was longer than the c't review -- seven terms in each of 21 fields -- but the article was shorter and less detailed. Die ZEIT was kind enough to extend the comparison to include both smaller German encyclopedias (Data Becker, aimed at a younger audience, and Universallexikon) and the English-language Britannica 2005 DVD. Britannica, she of the "legendary 32-volume set," took top marks in the sciences, but fell down when it came to sports and, most notably, current events. All the same, "the 165,000 well-sorted Web links alone are worth the price". As to that perennial bugbear, editorial responsibility, the reviewers tackle it with bold eloquence: "Those concerned with the quality of [Wikipedia] articles, because no established editorship takes responsibility for them, can rest at ease: we had most of the Wikipedia articles we examined judged separately by specialists in their respective fields, and they were thoroughly done. The texts still have gaps here and there, but they make up for it elsewhere with precise and detailed descriptions. And everyone can engage himself as a gap-filler: clicking on the link "edit this article" makes the reader an author." It's enough to make me want to be a first-time author all over again. Original article : http://www.zeit.de/2004/43/C-Enzyklop_8adien-Test (English translation available onli^B^B^B^B on request.) -- +sj+

4 5

Chinese simplified-traditional conversion
by Jens Ropers 16 Oct '04

16 Oct '04

I recall that ages ago there was a long (and almost acrimonious) discussion regarding the possibilities (or lack thereof) of conversion between traditional and simplified Chinese. Well, I just ran across this app: >> http://www.ideographer.com/chineserewriter/index_en.shtml It's Shareware, but it may not be open source. Nevertheless, taking the thing for a spin and maybe bugging the author with one or two questions surely can't hurt. The app is for Mac OS X however, so for those poor souls^W^W of us who don't have access to a Mac, you could either try pearPC (but if you're only doing it to run this app, then that's using heavy artillery to aim for sparrows) or see if you can email the author anyway. I do have a Mac, but sadly I don't understand Chinese. Anyway, I just meant to sent this to the list *just in case* it's of use. -- ropers [[en:User:Ropers]] www.ropersonline.com

1 0

Re: One Wikipedia - two scripts
by Erdal Ronahi 15 Oct '04

15 Oct '04

Hi Mark and everybody, Yes, Tahoma works (but is ugly and therefore not used on ar: for example) and is even more widespread than Unikurd Web. I just tried it on http://ku.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fontexample. The words there should look similar with the only difference being the diacriticals. I have not expressed myself correctly. The problem was not only the font, but the fact one cannot tell Wikipedia to use one font throughout an article if there are headings and lists. For the page name it doesn't work anyway. Something I forgot to mention was the edit window, words appear differently in the edit window and on the page or in the preview. An automatic script converter would be a fine thing, but there are also dialect differences. So an article in the two main dialects Kurmanci and Sorani would exist four times after automatic conversion into both scripts. At the moment we have three dialects represented which are only partly mutually intellegible. Until now all Sorani is written in arabic letter, all Kurmanci and Zazaki in latin letter with links to each other if the same article exists in different dialects. We like it that way, there were no objections yet. But because arabic and latin script are used for either of them, automatic script conversion would be fine on the long run. Technically it should be possible, as far as I know 1:1 conversion is possible. Erdal

3 5

Print edition of the newsletter
by Sj 15 Oct '04

15 Oct '04

Would anyone actually want a print copy of the foundation newsletter? This was discussed recently; I think it would be a neat thing to have, but then I have a fondness for printed matter. (I wonder if those of us who frequent mailing lists are a balanced audience to ask...) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk%3AWikimedia_Quarto#Newsletter_in_Print -- +sj+

10 22

Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese
by Gerard Meijssen 14 Oct '04

14 Oct '04

Hoi, In the past there have been heated debates about this subject, if you are interested in this subject, here is something uncontroversial for you; I am looking for the translations of these two terms in ANY language. Currently I know it in only three languages; Dutch, English and French. I would like to know it in all languages. This term is used to indicate in wiktionary that a translation of a word is in one of these two methods of writing. As such it is really usefull when I have this information. You can reply to me, but you can also be really bold and edit the pages on the nl:wiktionary. [[wikt:nl:eenvoudig Chinees]] [[wikt:nl:traditioneel Chinees]] Thanks, GerardM

2 1

One Wikipedia - two scripts
by Erdal Ronahi 12 Oct '04

12 Oct '04

Hi there! We on ku: have a problem. Kurdish uses two different scripts, latin and arabic. You can see both on the main page at http://ku.wikipedia.org. To keep the Kurdish Wikipedia together we would like to have both scripts in one Wikipedia. But there are some problems: * Though unicode supports the Arabic-letter Kurdish alphabet, very few fonts do. In the internet a special font named "Unikurd Web" is the de-facto standard for used on almost all websites. We use a template on every page that enforces the use of this font, but that does not work for the headings. Therefore there are wrong letters in the headings. See http://ku.wikipedia.org/wiki/mallewe for an example. The letter that looks like a "L" that has turned around is from a different font. Can this be solved with a global style sheet or something similar? The font is compatible with Unicode, so Arabic of Farsi words would not be harmed. To solve this problem would be the most important thing, because then all texts will be readable. Other minor problems: * The font ennforcing template {{rtl}} must be repeated after each heading. That will probably solve with the first problem. * Dotted lists cross the right border when used on right-to-left pages. (Also an example on http://ku.wikipedia.org/wiki/mallewe) Thanks, Erdal

2 1

Need urgent help! (Wikipedia)
by info＠konservativ.se 12 Oct '04

12 Oct '04

Hello! And greetings from Sweden! I would like to get in contact with any of the international organizers/leaders of the Wikipedia project! Over here in Sweden, I have problems with the correct information of political parties. Different political groups apparently rearrange each others pages. >From my point of view, I would like to secure the proper information in the interest of the public and the democratic community! Thus each party or political group should have control of their own pages, rather than to let their political opponents have the control. Who could I discuss this topic with? All the best! And good luck with a great project! Carl-Johan Swaerdenheim, SWEDEN The Swedish Conservative Party

3 2

Fw: [Wikipedia-l] New Wikipedia langage solresol
by oboenfan 11 Oct '04

11 Oct '04

----- Original Message ----- From: "oboenfan" <oboenfan(a)hotmail.com> To: "Rowan Collins" <rowan.collins(a)gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 1:27 AM Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] New Wikipedia langage solresol Hi Rowan Thank you very much to you personally. Your message did really comfort me last week. But I did find this matter really absurd: The administration of Wikipedia looks as a really terrible giant animal and to occupy too much a lot of people. This forum is alone a surprising kind to loose the time... I don't give up and realize without discussion with a lot of people and loosing of time a dictionary and all my other projects concerning old, menaced and artificial languages at the new anarchopedia. I did create French, German main pages, Spanish will follow in the next hours, and Interlingue, Solresol, Frater and more will follow in the next days.All that is new. I have to rectify a lot of text errors in a second time but it exists now. I is a good work for a short week where I have to go to my professional occupations. I did observe different problems in the approach of the things at Wikipedia and I work at anarchopedia that this don't appears in the new project. I think my technical approach of dictionary better and start for this reason a lot of languages myself. My first word, the first entry in the new multi language dictionary was of course a word in "a", naturally the word "anarchy". And if you compare the content of 2 dictionaries you can see a completely other view of our world. Anarchy is not conform to the bad definition in Wikipedia... At the letter "I" I will introduce in the next days as first word the word "idealism" ;-) Less bureaucracy (be quite: I didn't redefine in the first time at the letter "b" the word "bureaucracy" - "birth" is really more important!) Je veux remercier très spécialement Anthere, mon fier concitoyen, pour son intervention contre mes petits efforts anarchistes (je ne pensais pas le moins du monde à une telle définition de mes efforts il y a seulement 8 jours) car sans cette petite querelle vraiment juste au bon moment, je n'aurais jamais fait connaissance à cette date du projet des autres anarchistes! Mes visions de mon pays dans le continent qui l'héberge et surtout mes visions du rôle de mon continent en tant que réalité politique et sociale ne semble pas être totalement équivalentes aux vôtres! Perhaps is this the decisive reason why a Wikipedia can't be enough. Yours truly François > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rowan Collins" <rowan.collins(a)gmail.com> > To: <wikipedia-l(a)wikimedia.org>; <oboenfan(a)hotmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2004 6:20 PM > Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] New Wikipedia langage solresol > > > > Francois, > > please don't give up so easily. If you truly believe that this is > > something worth doing and encouraging, it should take more than a few > > people saying "maybe" rather than "yes" to make you give up. Nobody > > here has said "no" to your proposals; if you think you can make this > > work, then have courage and try to make it work, even when it seems > > difficult. I will try to address and discuss some of your current > > concerns below. > >

3 2

wikimedia meetup 2005 - final candidates
by Elisabeth Bauer 10 Oct '04

10 Oct '04

Hiho, As announced on meta-wiki, the selection round for the city where the wikimedia meetup will take place ended today. We compiled a list with the final candidates on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_meetup_2005/City_Candidate_List * Amsterdam/Rotterdam, Netherlands * Berlin, Germany * Cluj-Napoca, Romania * Dublin, Ireland * Frankfurt am Main, Germany * Ljubljana, Slovenia To make the final decision we asked some well known wikipedians from countries around the world. The people you'll have to bribe ;-) are: Angela, Anthere, Jimbo, Danny, Krzysztof P. Jasiutowicz, Tomos, Brion Vibber, Oscar and Gerard Meijssen, Arno Lagrange and elian. I want to invite these people and all the wikipedians who proposed one of the finalists and are willing to act as local coordinators for a first meeting on IRC. I propose Sunday 17th October, 18:00 UTC, if you have troubles with this date, state this on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_meetup_2005 please. greetings, elian

2 1

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 October 2004