Wikipedia-l April 2005

wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

108 participants
93 discussions

Using commons - license issue
by Karl Eichwalder 16 Apr '05

16 Apr '05

In the 'de' Wikipedia you can reference a piction from commons as follows: [[Bild:Hagen Osthaus Museum Traditional Main Entrance keichwa.jpg|thumb|Osthaus Museum]] If you click on the thumb you will be taken to: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:Hagen_Osthaus_Museum_Traditional_Main_Ent… Where you read: This file is a shared upload and may be used by other projects. This is not enough. Please include the description from "commons" and provide a back-link to http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Hagen_Osthaus_Museum_Traditional_Ma… ; [[:commons:Image:Hagen Osthaus Museum Traditional Main Entrance keichwa.jpg]] seems to do the trick. If you do not provide some such info, you don't have the right to copy the image from "commons". I release it under the conditions of the "Attribution ShareAlike 1.0 License". IIRC, you talked about the weakness of the current system soem months ago - it is hard to believe that this rather serious issue is still not fixed. -- http://www.gnu.franken.de/ke/ | ,__o | _-\_<, | (*)/'(*) Key fingerprint = F138 B28F B7ED E0AC 1AB4 AA7F C90A 35C3 E9D0 5D1C

2 2

Re: [Wikipedia-l] IMPORTANT Sent copyeditors, proofreaders to WQ/3/Draft -OFFLIST
by rose.parks＠att.net 16 Apr '05

16 Apr '05

Sj+, Based on a number of e-mails of yours, like the one below, when I emailed the copyeditors and proofreaders, I sent them to: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WQ/3/Draft Now, I see that any content submitted is on: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WQ/3 or the "retro" page. Do I re-email them, or will the content be moved to: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WQ/3/Draft As Ever, Ruth Ifcher -- -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Sj <2.718281828(a)gmail.com> > Hello all, > > The third Wikimedia Quarto is coming out next month, and we need your > input. Please submit ideas and short (1 paragraph) abstracts to > newsletter--at--wikimedia.org over the coming week. Or you can start > writing your submission on the draft page on meta: > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WQ/Draft > > Translators: Please distribute this note to your local projects. See also > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Translation_requests/WQ/2/Release_message > > > When you submit an abstract, you will get feedback about how long to > make the piece, and for what deadline. General timeline: > * Short abstracts of submissions : by Friday, April 1 > * Draft submissions : by Friday, April 8 > * Translations start : April 18 > > Don't forget to submit memories of Wikipedias past for the special Retro report! > You can see the first two editions of the Quarto on the foundation site: > http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Quarto > > As always, feedback and design ideas are welcome. If you're > interested in working on production of this and future Quartos, see > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WQ/Team > > +sj+ > _______________________________________________ > Wikipedia-l mailing list > Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l

1 0

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Idea for a new Wikipedia
by Wouter Steenbeek 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

> >That was a point that I have no known! Thanks for the information! >I don't know much about the Wikipeadia away from the German is there a >place where is it easy to ask people if they wanna help or is the German >Wikipedia the right place? > You can ask anything here, though most people are already firmly into Wikipedia when they joing the list. But you can try http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Forum as well, which has the advantage that you're answered in your native tongue. _________________________________________________________________ Nooit ongewenste berichten ontvangen: gebruik MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/

1 0

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Idea for a new Wikipedia
by pentiumforever＠email.de 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org schrieb am 15.04.05 18:04:26: > > > >I have understand the term of the simpel English Wikipedia so that they > >want to create a Wikipedia with a easy English (language), I think this is > >very good for non English people with a not so good English. My term is it > >to create a Wikipedia that use a easy German and discribe it easy that mean > >that there should be no words, beside it is impossibel, they are not for > >the whole people (particularly kids and teenagers) not easy understand. And > >if we must use one of this words we should discribe it. It should be of a > >layer for kids between 10 to 16! > > > >The discribtion is not good but I hope ii is enough for the moment! > > > >pentiumforever > > One of the Simple English Wikipedia's main target groups /are/ children, > pentiumforever. Check it out at > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simple_English_language . Children speakers of > English face exactly the same problem as you discribe. So your proposal is > indeed very analogous to the existing Simple English wikipedia. By the way, > you should post your proposal on > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_new_languages. I suggest the > domain einfach.wikipedia.org. > > Wouter > > _________________________________________________________________ > Direct antwoord op je vragen: gebruik MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/ > > _______________________________________________ > Wikipedia-l mailing list > Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l That was a point that I have no known! Thanks for the information! I don't know much about the Wikipeadia away from the German is there a place where is it easy to ask people if they wanna help or is the German Wikipedia the right place?

1 0

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Idea for a new Wikipedia
by pentiumforever＠email.de 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org schrieb am 15.04.05 17:44:29: > > > >From: <pentiumforever(a)email.de> > > >Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org > > >To: wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org > > >Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Idea for a new Wikipedia > > >Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:40:05 +0200 > > > > > >Hi, > > >at first sorry for my bad english i'm just a (german) student ;) > > > > > >If I read/write somethings in the German wikipedia I have seen that much > of > > >the articles are to havy for kids and teenager with no special skills in > > >the subjekt. So I get the idea for a special Wikipedia for kids and > > >teenager! Its is like a Wikijunior Magazin but with the different that > the > > >Wiki I mean is a complete encyclopedia and not only one special topic! I > > >would be managed a Wiki for this in German. > > > > > >What do you think about the idea? It is possibel to realise it under the > > >roof of the Wikimedia? If yes anyone here that would be help me? > > > > > >pentiumforever > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Wikipedia-l mailing list > > >Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org > > >http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l > > Would make more sense if you proposed a Simple German Wikipedia, although > judging by the performance of the Simple English one, I can't see there > being many good contributors. > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikipedia-l mailing list > Wikipedia-l(a)Wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l I have understand the term of the simpel English Wikipedia so that they want to create a Wikipedia with a easy English (language), I think this is very good for non English people with a not so good English. My term is it to create a Wikipedia that use a easy German and discribe it easy that mean that there should be no words, beside it is impossibel, they are not for the whole people (particularly kids and teenagers) not easy understand. And if we must use one of this words we should discribe it. It should be of a layer for kids between 10 to 16! The discribtion is not good but I hope ii is enough for the moment! pentiumforever

2 1

FOLDOC, acknowledgments and GFDL
by wiki pedista 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

In a discussion back in 2002 (starting about here (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia/2002-August/021718.html ) It was decided that the acknowledgment for the use of FOLDOC material would be on the same page. I have seen that said mentions still exist, with the use of a template. Now the questions. *Is this a legal requirement that comes from some interpretation of our venerable GFDL or just courtesy? *In either case, do the rights to modify our material include the right of moving that notice to a less prominent place, or removing it altogether? *In [[Wikipedia:Boilerplate_request_for_permission]], such mention is offered ''If you do agree to grant permission for use, we will credit you for your work in the resulting article's references section by stating it was based on your work and is used with your permission, and by providing a link back to your website. '' Is this is still valid? Can we assure that our re-users would keep that? Sorry if this was already discussed somewhere else, and long ago, but some recent issues in the Spanish Wikipedia demand that we have a clearer understanding of this. Thank you, AstroNomer __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Find what you need with new enhanced search. http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250

7 10

sorry
by Wouter Steenbeek 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

I apologise for just having sent the same silly message twice. Wouter _________________________________________________________________ Direct antwoord op je vragen: gebruik MSN Messenger http://messenger.msn.nl/

1 0

Re: Conflict between two Wikipedias
by Wikipedia Romania (Ronline) 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

Mark, you said: "But I think that the majority of users of mo.wikipedia will, no matter what, always be primarily users of Cyrillic, and I think that it should be dominant there until such time as there are more Moldovan users there who use Latin, if that is ever the case." I think that is not at all right. I mean, Cyrillic is a minority script in _all_ circumstances. Only 10% of speakers of Moldo-Romanian in Moldova use it, and only around 33% of people who say they speak Moldovan use it. So those who say they speak Moldovan, will be looking actually mostly for Latin content, especially since many of the Cyrillic speakers are also used to Latin content because that's the script they use in public institutions, at work, etc. Also, "since we already have two separate Wikipedias, we can use ro.wiki for /all/ Latin-script content, and mo.wiki for /all/ Cyrillic-script content" I've kept on saying that this is a practical solution, but it isn't really a correct solution - While the interesting context of the Moldo-Romanian language would state that a mo.wiki in Cyrillic only would be the most practical solution, it would basically be very biased, despite the prominent link. The prominent link is just a redirect, the interface would still be in Cyrillic, the interwiki links would still go to Cyrillic articles. We can't nominate a Wikipedia for Cyrillic content, even though the case of Moldo-Romanian would say that perhaps logically it is a way to go, simply because we can't nominate a language subdomain for a certain script when that script is a minority script. That's what needs to be understood here - Cyrillic is a minority script in all cases - for Moldo-Romanian speakers worldwide, for Moldo-Romanian speakers in Moldova and for Moldovan speakers in Moldova. So we need content to first cater for the majority, which could be either at mo.wiki or ro.wiki, but I think ro.wiki would be the more practical solution, unless some Moldovans would actually have a problem with being redirected to a Romanian Wikipedia, which they might have. We need to hear their side of the story too, but there are as of yet barely any Moldovan Latin users. There should be a very prominent link on the mo.wiki page redirecting Cyrillic users to their subdomain. Interwiki links would then go to mo-cyr: and be put in the form of "Moldoveanească (Chirilic)" in the Cyrillic alphabet. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/

2 1

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Alexa.com blogs about Wikipedia
by mbecker ™ 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

5 4

Fwd: [Wikipedia-l] Conflict between two Wikipedias
by Milos Rancic 15 Apr '05

15 Apr '05

On 4/14/05, Mark Williamson <node.ue(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I guess that this is OK. > > But I think that the majority of users of mo.wikipedia will, no matter > what, always be primarily users of Cyrillic, and I think that it > should be dominant there until such time as there are more Moldovan > users there who use Latin, if that is ever the case. > ... > And as I noted earlier, conversion between Latin Moldovan and Cyrillic > Moldovan by computer is not possible or at least not practical (it > would require neural networking or AI or something) If the situation is that Moldovans which call their language Romanian use Latin and Moldovans which call their language Molodvan use Cyrillic -- then I don't see any problem :) mo: should be Cyrillic and Moldavian, ro: should be Latin and Romanian. What are the differences between Latin and Cyrillic Moldovan? I am not sure that it is not possible to make some kind of not so complicated program for transliteration. > By the way, why exactly is it that there are separate Wikipedias for > Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian? If everybody worked together, you > could have a much larger Wikipedia by now - Serbian has over 10k, but > Croatian is quite large too and Bosnian has over 1000 - imagine if you > worked together to make one Wikipedia. Hmmm... Imagine that: When Hungarian say on Hungarian Wikipedia that Romanian occupied Transilvania and Romaians say on Romanian Wikipedia that Romanians liberated Transilvania -- there are no a lot of people who would care about it. Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks have a lot of such (explicite or potential) conflicts. A lot of such conflits exist on English Wikipedia. I think that we would have a lot of troubles if there is one Wikipedia, such Serbo-Croatian Wikipedia was. When I finish some work for Serbian Wikipedia, I'll implement it on Croatian (they agree with that) and Bosnian (I'll ask when I finish work for sr:). Also, it is possible to make some kind of inteligent program for "translating" articles in the way Serbian<->Croatian<->Bosnian. And I'll do that in the future.

1 0

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Older →

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 April 2005