Q: Currently you are using an individual engagement grant, what about the future when the grant has finished or spent? How you will fund your UG?A: The UG does not need funding per se. As explained in the "Transforming words into action" section of the UG page, only some projects will require monetary support. When money is needed, grants can be used.
Q: I want to know if you are thinking in future. Are you thinking in a kind of organization for your UG like a proposal of Board, structure or membership requirements for WS UG?A: Not yet. Personally, the UG will be primarily a means for discussion. Wikisource language communities should interact more.If organization is needed, I propose the election of three or four leaders. If membership requirements are needed, I propose the following ones. "You can join the UG if you have made 15+ (fifteen or more) edits to Wikisource _and_ your first one dates back to 5+ (five or more) days ago."
Q: Until now Aubrey and Micru are the most active in the UG, what about the rest of supporters? Are they really involved? Are there real-life activities to involve them? Have any plan for a future face-to-face meeting?A: You can find me online, though I could not currently take part in any real-life activity or meeting. Discussions are among my favorite activities. I'd sometimes like more radical decisions instead of having legacy around. "Don't be afraid of innovations" could/will be one of the UG's principles.
Hi,<br/><br/>We're looking at a collaboration where we might get newspapers from the 1850s. Can we upload these onto WikiSource? Any useful structural systems in place to handle this?<br/><br/>Pradeep<br/><br/>Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPhone
P.s.: P.s.: You can check whether the WMF protects the logo of your
project by seeing if it's listed as "registered trademark" on
-------- Messaggio originale --------
Oggetto: [Wikimedia-l] It's time to reclaim the community logo
Data: Sat, 21 Sep 2013 12:16:16 +0200
Mittente: Tomasz W. Kozlowski
this is to inform you that in response to the trademarking of the
Wikimedia community logo, created in 2006 by Artur “WarX”
Fijałkowski, which was discussed on this mailing list as well as on
Meta back in March, a small group of community members—Artur, myself,
Federico Leva (Nemo) and John Vandenberg—have initiated a formal process
of opposition against the registration of the trademark by the
Foundation in order to *reclaim the logo* for unrestricted use by the
We appreciate the Foundation’s protection of the other trademarks they
have registered so far, including the logos of Wikipedia, Wikisource and
some other sister projects. In the case of the community logo, however,
it is our belief that the Foundation’s actions are exactly opposite to
what the community logo stands for and contradict the purpose behind its
We would like to make it clear that it is not our intention to damage
anyone; our actions are a challenge against what we perceive as
unilateral declaration of ownership of an asset that has always belonged
to the wider community, and not to one or another organisation that is
part of the movement. By formally opposing the registration of the
trademark we hope to ensure the history of this logo is not disregarded,
and we wish to protect the community against unnecessary bureaucracy
and, to use another quote, let “groups who do not purport to represent
the WMF” to continue to be able to freely associate with a logo that
has been part of their identity for so long.
We also want to note that this is in no way a legal action against the
Foundation, but a simple notice of opposition against the registration
of the logo in the European Union. If we assume good faith, we can only
be confident that the WMF, having now a formal occasion, will withdraw
its registration of the logo rather than continue using movement
resources to force the community into lengthy, expensive proceedings.
We invite all community members interested in this issue to express
their opinions at:
If any of you would like to help us in any way (covering the costs of
the opposition, promoting the discussion, etc.), please feel free to
contact us off–list.
Artur Fijalkowski (WarX)
Tomasz Kozlowski (odder)
Federico Leva (Nemo)
John Vandenberg (jayvdb)
== References ==
*  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_Community_Logo.svg
*  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Logo
Wikimedia-l mailing list
me and David (plus John, Tpt, Candalua, and now *you*)
are preparing this survey to know more about what WS editors know and think
about Wikisource and its future:
You are welcome to come and edit the survey, adding questions you feel as
important or gjust giving us some feedback.
We feel that data gathered from this survey could be crucial to understand
a bit what the gloabal community wants and how to reach that.
Me and Micru would use the data to write a document to present to WMF and
other organizations (Wikimedia chapters, OKFN, etc.).
With the help of the whole Wikisource community, our aim is to draft a
proposal for the development of some core features.
We strongly believe that if the Wikisource community can express his
opinion on this, the WMF (or other entities) will be able to finally
dedicate some resources to improve Wikisource infrastructure.
This is why is crucial that everyone interested step in and improve the
After that, we will be able to promote it in all Wikisources, and wait for
editors to respond.
Please, tell me what you think about it.
There are many difficulties I see with Scripto as an alternative to
1) all metadata about e.g. the order of pages within a book lives within
the CMS scripto is connected to. This means that features like PediaPress
won't work, as they can't navigate from page 2 to page 3.
2) the actual images live on the connected CMS -- in fact the CMS is the
whole interface to the wiki.
I imagine that the Scripto folks would be happy to weigh in, though.
(They're great people -- post on their dev list and see if they'll comment.)
If wikisource were to look at an alternative to ProofRead Page, I suspect
that the Bentham Transcription Desk might be a more appropriate,
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 7:00 AM,
> Send Wikisource-l mailing list submissions to
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikisource-l digest..."
> Today's Topics:
> 1. Re: Scripto, free software for transcribing documents
> (Andrea Zanni)
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 16:37:35 +0200
> From: Andrea Zanni <zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com>
> To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
> Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Scripto, free software for transcribing
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> I wantet to rejoice this old mail from Lars:
> Scripto is an alternative to the ProofreadPage extension used
> by Wikisource. It is based on Mediawiki but also on OpenLayers,
> the software used to zoom and pan in OpenStreetMap.
> The only website I have seen that uses Scripto is the U.K.
> War Department papers, and in many ways it is more clumsy
> than ProofreadPage. But there might be a few ideas that could
> be worth picking up. Take a look.
> The software is described at http://scripto.org/
> As for reference installations, they mention
> Does anyone know this software?
> Could we be interested?
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Lars Aronsson <lars(a)aronsson.se> wrote:
> > Scripto is an alternative to the ProofreadPage extension used
> > by Wikisource. It is based on Mediawiki but also on OpenLayers,
> > the software used to zoom and pan in OpenStreetMap.
> > The only website I have seen that uses Scripto is the U.K.
> > War Department papers, and in many ways it is more clumsy
> > than ProofreadPage. But there might be a few ideas that could
> > be worth picking up. Take a look.
> > The software is described at http://scripto.org/
> > As for reference installations, they mention
> > http://wardepartmentpapers.org/transcribe.php
> > --
> > Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
> > Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikisource-l mailing list
> > Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Scripto is an alternative to the ProofreadPage extension used
by Wikisource. It is based on Mediawiki but also on OpenLayers,
the software used to zoom and pan in OpenStreetMap.
The only website I have seen that uses Scripto is the U.K.
War Department papers, and in many ways it is more clumsy
than ProofreadPage. But there might be a few ideas that could
be worth picking up. Take a look.
The software is described at http://scripto.org/
As for reference installations, they mention
Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se
as many of you know, we are asking the Affiliation Committee to create a
"Wikisource User Group"
The idea is very simple:
we can create a group of interested Wikisource users, share ideas and
and also interact with GLAMs in outreach activities.
Many of you signed the page, so what I'm asking you is to decide together
what we do want to do with the User Group, as the AffCom asked us
IMHO, the best way to do this is:
* notify your own Wikisource about this idea, so we can spread the word
* discuss on the Talk page (or here, if you prefer) about what we want to
do, and what is your idea.
For you convenience, here are the questions with my own answers:
- Currently you are using an individual engagement grant, what about the
future when the grant has finished or spent? How you will fund your UG?
Me and Micru are concluding our IEG, but currently no money were spent on
the user group, and we don't see the need of funds coming for quite some
time. It is possible that in the future, if the Ws UG is succesfull, it
will need some funds, but there will be time to plan this and ask to the
GAC, for example, for specific projects.
- I want to know if you are thinking in future. Are you thinking in a
kind of organization for your UG like a proposal of Board, structure or
membership requirements for WS UG?
Right now, no.
We are thinking of gathering people from different Wikisource communities
to boost coordination and join our forces in making Wikisource the great
project it deserves. We need software development and together we can
propose the WMF or other entities to fund some projects or dedicate some
- Untill now Aubrey and Micru are the most active in the UG, what about
the rest of supporters? Are they really involved? Are there real-life
activities to involve them? Have any plan for a future face-to-face meeting?
Well, this is up to you :-)