I suppose this may interest you.
Sorry for crossposting; please join the discussion on foundation-l, if
you wish.
Nemo
-------- Messaggio Originale --------
Oggetto: Five-year WMF targets exclude non-Wikipedia projects
Data: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 12:33:07 +0200
Da: Federico Leva (Nemo)
A: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List <foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Despite repeated assurances at Wikimania, on lists and on strategywiki,
that the strategic plan was going to consider all Wikimedia projects as
important, now at
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Five-year_targets the
second target, «Increase the amount of information we offer» considers
only the number of Wikipedia articles.
«We're aware of the challenges around bot-created articles, articles of
low quality, etc., and the limited focus on Wikipedia, so this metric
shouldn't be seen in isolation, but is an important indicator.» Yes, but
a wrong one.
I'm, very, very disappointed: I have to conclude that all the words on
community participation etc. were only empty rhetoric.
Nemo
Reminder: we are having an open meeting in an hour on #wikimedia. -SJ
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Samuel J Klein <sj(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> In an annual effort to welcome new Board members with an informal
> chat, the newest Wikimedia Trustees (Phoebe and Bishakha) are taking
> part in an open meeting on IRC this Saturday. This is a forum to
> discuss Wikimedia issues and anything else that's on your mind.
>
> Where : #wikimedia on irc.freenode.net
> When : Saturday September 11, 1600-1700 UTC
> (That's 0900 PST / 1200 EST / 1800 CEST / 2130 IST)
>
> All are welcome - please join the meeting with ideas or questions
> about Wikimedia and the Projects, or simply with good cheer! If you
> have a topic to add to the agenda, please add it on Meta:
>
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_meetings#September_2010
>
> We will keep the meeting to an hour, and will cover the agenda before
> moving to an open discussion. Summary minutes will be published.
>
> I hope to see many of you there,
> Sam
>
--
Samuel Klein identi.ca:sj w:user:sj
--
Samuel Klein identi.ca:sj w:user:sj
On 08/07/2010 02:23 AM, Andreas Kolbe wrote:
> Word-processing the Google output to arrive at a readable, written text creates more work than it saves.
This is where our experience differs. I'm working faster with the Google
Translator Toolkit than without.
> If Google want to build up their translation memory, I suggest they pay publishers for permission to analyse existing, published translations, and read those into their memory. This will give them a database of translations that the market judged good enough to publish, written by people who (presumably) understood the subject matter they were working in.
If we forget Google for a while, this is actually something that we could do
on our own. There are enough texts in Wikisource (out of copyright books)
that are available in more than one language. In some cases, we will run
into old spelling and use of language, but it will be better than nothing.
The result could be good input to Wiktionary.
Here is the Norwegian original of Nansen's Eskimoliv,
http://no.wikisource.org/wiki/Indeks:Nansen-Eskimoliv.djvu
And here is the Swedish translation, both from 1891,
http://sv.wikisource.org/wiki/Index:Eskimålif.djvu
Norwegian: Grønland er paa en eiendommelig vis knyttet til vort land og
folk.
Swedish: Grönland är på ett egendomligt sätt knutet till vårt land och
vårt folk.
As you can see, there is one difference already in this first
sentence: The original ends "to our country and people",
while the translation ends "to our country and our people".
Is there any good free software for aligning parallel texts and
extracting translations? Looking around, I found NAtools,
TagAligner, and Bitextor, but they require texts to be marked
up already. Are these the best and most modern tools available?
--
Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se
Forwarded from Wikitech-l via Commons-l
----
Chris McKenna
cmckenna(a)sucs.org
www.sucs.org/~cmckenna
The essential things in life are seen not with the eyes,
but with the heart
Antoine de Saint Exupery
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Hi all,
We are currently relocating some servers internally in the datacenter.
As a consequence, search snippets, "did you mean..." and interwiki
search are going to be turned off during this time, and only bare
results shown. This will affect all WMF wikis. I expect, if everything
goes well, that in around 4-5h things are going to go back to normal.
Cheers, Robert
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--
Huib "Abigor" Laurens
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
Hoi,
In the last week we had new functionality go live in OmegaWiki that point
you to Wikipedia articles and to the Commons category. We prefer to point
you to an article in your language. A good example can be found in todays
word of the day: astronomia horloĝo.
<http://www.omegawiki.org/Expression:astronomia_horlo%C4%9Do>
We aim to give you a link to your language, but when we do not have it,
English is what we fall back to and whatever is available is next. In the
link we state that it is a "Wikipedia article" or a "Commons category". We
need your help for the translation of these expressions.
I am quite pleased that thanks to the great work of Kipcool the argument for
OmegaWiki as a WMF project started by Milos is that much stronger.
Thanks,
GerardM
http://www.omegawiki.org/Expression:Wikipedia_articlehttp://www.omegawiki.org/Expression:Commons category
(Just poking foundation-l, please continue with discussion at
wiktionary-l, or, better, at Meta [1])
During Wikimania I asked Gerard Meijssen would he be willing to give
OmegaWiki to Wikimedia. He said that he doesn't have anything against
it: software is free, content is free. More precisely, he told to me
"Take it!" :)
My initial idea was that it would be the best to replace all
Wiktionaries with OmegaWiki. However, the last day of Wikimania I was
talking with one Swedish guy who is working on Swedish Wiktionary. He
has complained that philologists like more open form for writing
dictionary. Thus, my suggestion is to adopt OmegaWiki as one of
Wiktionaries, probably as http://wiktionary.org/, similarly to the
multilingual Wikisource.
And, of course, before possible adoption we need discussion and some
software improvements of Wikidata extension.
[1] - http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Adopt_OmegaWiki
* * *
As multilingual projects are not in the scope of the [[Language
committee]], before the implementation (or not) of the idea, community
should discuss about it.
[http://www.omegawiki.org/ OmegaWiki] is a formal multilingual
dictionary based on MediaWiki extension
[[:mw:Extension:Wikidata|Wikidata]].
No matter would it be the only Wiktionary or it would be just one of
the Wiktionaries, OmegaWiki would raise quality of Wiktionaries. At
the other side, the project would get much more attention as a
Wikimedia project.
Wikidata extension should be improved (from user experience and
linguistic points of view) before implementation as Wikimedia project.
[[User:GerardM|Gerard Meijssen]], the founder of OmegaWiki project,
doesn't have anything against adopting it as a Wikimedia project.
== Advantages and disadvantages of adopting OmegaWiki ==
=== Advantages ===
* It is possible to create one billion entries per Wiktionary: All
synthetic languages could import at least ~10M of words, but probably
more if all common phrases are counted. Thus, it means that we need
just 100 synthetic or polysynthetic languages to create one billion
entries per Wiktionary. This is very large number and while it is
possible to keep technically one such project, presently it is hardly
possible to keep a number of projects with more than billion of
entries.
* It is structured formally.
* ...
=== Disadvantages ===
* Philologists like more open form for dictionaries.
* OmegaWiki is distant from the wiki principle. Software fixes should
make it closer.
* ...
== How to adopt OmegaWiki ==
* Instead of all Wiktionaries.
* As www.wiktionary.org, like www.wikisource.org is the place for
multilingual Wikisource.
* As mul.wiktionary.org (ISO 639-5 code for multilingual entities)
* ...?
== Minimums for adopting OmegaWiki ==
=== If OmegaWiki replaces all Wiktionaries ===
* Evaluation of software by linguists and adding necessary linguistic features.
* Fixing bugs in software if needed.
* Adding all needed features to satisfy philological needs.
* Importing all data from Wiktionaries.
=== If OmegaWiki becomes one of the Wiktionaries ===
* Evaluation of software by linguists and adding necessary linguistic features.
* Fixing bugs in software if needed.
== Licensing ==
OmegaWiki licences are CC-BY and GFDL. It is a bit of pleonasm, as
CC-BY is a subset of GFDL (and CC-BY-SA as well).
* Licensing should probably stay CC-BY, not CC-BY-SA. There is a legal
problem of copyrighting words, phrases, sentences and definitions,
which mean that it would be probably better to leave the least
restrictive license as the OmegaWiki license.
* ...
[[Category:Requests for comments]]
Hoi,
To answer some questions...
- when some Wiktionary projects are affected by it, then it is for them
to take or not take the consequences.
- with more content, OmegaWiki will provide a better service to more
languages.
- there has never been an issue with communities, OmegaWiki still has its
own community. It has different rules then Wikimedia projects (we are not
afraid to give admin rights to everyone and we do not regret that)
- When OmegaWiki becomes a WMF project, there will be no split .. why
would it?
- OmegaWiki conforms to what is a wiki. Ward Cunningham says so. The
notion that a project behaves different is normal. Wikibooks, Wiktionary,
Wikipedia, Commons all have their own little differences. The same is true
for OmegaWiki.
Yes I can think of more questions, but the motivation for me is that it will
allow us (ie WMF) to do new things. It will improve the ability of people to
more easily find information, pictures. That is what we aim to do. It is
easy to think up what will divide us, it is harder to see that there is a
benefit when we allow for change.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 19 July 2010 17:54, Lodewijk <lodewijk(a)effeietsanders.org> wrote:
> I think it would be best to first discuss the general question (if) and
> later more specific questions (how) like the license. Although important,
> it
> is more important to determine if we want this in the first place. Once we
> know that, we can work out the exact conditions from both sides :)
>
> Questions to consider in the if-question would be:
> * How does this influence other projects, both positively and negatively
> * Do we believe there can be a stable community supporting this (this has
> proven to be problematic in the past)
> * Would it be good for OmegaWiki, or would it mean that it would
> practically
> split up and that two competing projects arise?
> * Do we want anything that doesnt work exactly like MediaWiki works in
> enwiki (as in, more database-like), is that a nogo?
>
> Probably you can imagine more questions like this.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> 2010/7/19 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
>
> > Hoi,
> > OmegaWiki is truly multi lingual in that depending on the amount of
> content
> > available in a language labels and annotations will show up in the
> > preferred
> > language. Recently many of the relevant phrases were localised in Telugu
> > and
> > consequently it became useful in Telugu.
> >
> > When a language is right to left the user interface and the data is shown
> > in
> > the right to left direction.
> >
> > One or the more interesting things of OmegaWiki is that we do have links
> to
> > Commons and Wikipedia. This means that when you look for pictures of a
> > "hobune" you will actually find them. Having links to Wikipedia means
> that
> > they can effectively work as interwiki links.
> >
> > To understand why we at OmegaWiki want the WMF to adopt this project, we
> > have always wanted OmegaWiki to be a WMF project. As far as the
> suggestion
> > goes to end the Wiktionary projects, we have always said that this is for
> > the Wiktionary projects themselves to decide. However particularly for
> the
> > smaller projects the effort of adding content to OmegaWiki is more
> > efficient
> > as more people benefit from work that only needs to be done once.
> >
> > As OmegaWiki has its data in a database, it is possible to use the data
> in
> > applications. This is very much our goal ... we are on record saying
> > "success is when people find an application for our data we did not think
> > off."
> >
> > As to the license, PD would be our preferred license but sadly their are
> > too
> > many people who consider that their must be a license because ... In our
> > view making our data available under a license prevents success. This is
> a
> > reason why we are not interested in "copyright violations".
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 19 July 2010 09:05, Milos Rancic <millosh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > (Just poking foundation-l, please continue with discussion at
> > > wiktionary-l, or, better, at Meta [1])
> > >
> > > During Wikimania I asked Gerard Meijssen would he be willing to give
> > > OmegaWiki to Wikimedia. He said that he doesn't have anything against
> > > it: software is free, content is free. More precisely, he told to me
> > > "Take it!" :)
> > >
> > > My initial idea was that it would be the best to replace all
> > > Wiktionaries with OmegaWiki. However, the last day of Wikimania I was
> > > talking with one Swedish guy who is working on Swedish Wiktionary. He
> > > has complained that philologists like more open form for writing
> > > dictionary. Thus, my suggestion is to adopt OmegaWiki as one of
> > > Wiktionaries, probably as http://wiktionary.org/, similarly to the
> > > multilingual Wikisource.
> > >
> > > And, of course, before possible adoption we need discussion and some
> > > software improvements of Wikidata extension.
> > >
> > > [1] -
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Adopt_OmegaWiki
> > >
> > > * * *
> > >
> > > As multilingual projects are not in the scope of the [[Language
> > > committee]], before the implementation (or not) of the idea, community
> > > should discuss about it.
> > >
> > > [http://www.omegawiki.org/ OmegaWiki] is a formal multilingual
> > > dictionary based on MediaWiki extension
> > > [[:mw:Extension:Wikidata|Wikidata]].
> > >
> > > No matter would it be the only Wiktionary or it would be just one of
> > > the Wiktionaries, OmegaWiki would raise quality of Wiktionaries. At
> > > the other side, the project would get much more attention as a
> > > Wikimedia project.
> > >
> > > Wikidata extension should be improved (from user experience and
> > > linguistic points of view) before implementation as Wikimedia project.
> > >
> > > [[User:GerardM|Gerard Meijssen]], the founder of OmegaWiki project,
> > > doesn't have anything against adopting it as a Wikimedia project.
> > >
> > > == Advantages and disadvantages of adopting OmegaWiki ==
> > >
> > > === Advantages ===
> > > * It is possible to create one billion entries per Wiktionary: All
> > > synthetic languages could import at least ~10M of words, but probably
> > > more if all common phrases are counted. Thus, it means that we need
> > > just 100 synthetic or polysynthetic languages to create one billion
> > > entries per Wiktionary. This is very large number and while it is
> > > possible to keep technically one such project, presently it is hardly
> > > possible to keep a number of projects with more than billion of
> > > entries.
> > > * It is structured formally.
> > > * ...
> > >
> > > === Disadvantages ===
> > > * Philologists like more open form for dictionaries.
> > > * OmegaWiki is distant from the wiki principle. Software fixes should
> > > make it closer.
> > > * ...
> > >
> > > == How to adopt OmegaWiki ==
> > > * Instead of all Wiktionaries.
> > > * As www.wiktionary.org, like www.wikisource.org is the place for
> > > multilingual Wikisource.
> > > * As mul.wiktionary.org (ISO 639-5 code for multilingual entities)
> > > * ...?
> > >
> > > == Minimums for adopting OmegaWiki ==
> > >
> > > === If OmegaWiki replaces all Wiktionaries ===
> > > * Evaluation of software by linguists and adding necessary linguistic
> > > features.
> > > * Fixing bugs in software if needed.
> > > * Adding all needed features to satisfy philological needs.
> > > * Importing all data from Wiktionaries.
> > >
> > > === If OmegaWiki becomes one of the Wiktionaries ===
> > > * Evaluation of software by linguists and adding necessary linguistic
> > > features.
> > > * Fixing bugs in software if needed.
> > >
> > > == Licensing ==
> > >
> > > OmegaWiki licences are CC-BY and GFDL. It is a bit of pleonasm, as
> > > CC-BY is a subset of GFDL (and CC-BY-SA as well).
> > >
> > > * Licensing should probably stay CC-BY, not CC-BY-SA. There is a legal
> > > problem of copyrighting words, phrases, sentences and definitions,
> > > which mean that it would be probably better to leave the least
> > > restrictive license as the OmegaWiki license.
> > > * ...
> > >
> > > [[Category:Requests for comments]]
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > foundation-l mailing list
> > > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
John Vandenberg, 16/07/2010 03:03:
>> The Perseus project is an *amazing* project, but I regard them far more ahead
>> than us. The PP is actually a Virtual Research Environment, with tools for
>> scholars and researcher for studying texts, (concordances and similar stuff).
>
> I agree. I would go further; PP will always be far more advanced than
> a mediawiki system.
>
> They store their data in TEI format, which is an extremely rich
> standard. Wikisource can incorporate some of the TEI concepts by
> using templates, but I doubt we could ever be a leader in this area,
> nor do I think we want to.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Text_Encoding_Initiative
The en.wiki article doesn't really explain anything: there is a great
article in Italian, though.
But apart from TEI, how do they work? Is there someone who can describe
their workflow, as André did for PGDP?
> Again, interoperability is the first step towards useful
> 'collaboration'. i.e. Wikisource needs to export TEI. Then we could
> feed our poorly annotated/described sources into PP, where the
> academic community would then add the metadata.
>
> TEI export would also be useful for wiktionary.
Ok, TEI is awesome, but if you want metadata it's simpler to implement
them directly in Wikisource than exporting our content in some other
project hoping they will add metadatas.
Aubrey mentioned LiberLiber, the Italian PG/PGDP; not only they're
moving to MediaWiki, they want to implement an extension to add OAI-PMH.
The project is named Open Alexandria because with OAI-PMH you can create
a global huge digital library even if the actual "shelves" are scattered
in several sources: http://www.openalexandria.org/online/?lang=en
>> Just one more thing: why this awesome thread has not been linked to the
>> source-l? Probably that would have been the best place to discuss.
>
> ;-)
Changing subject is good, but if you reply to another thread clients
will merge the new to the old thread, and if the latter is heated and
has low signal/noise ratio the former will be buried in it...
Nemo
Due to numerous requests we have extended the submission deadline for
Wikimania 2010 as follows:
* Abstract Registration: May 24, 11.59 p.m. (Pacific Time)
* Notification for workshops: May 29, 11.59 p.m. (Pacific Time)
* Notification for panels, tutorials, presentations: June 3, 11.59
p.m. (Pacific Time)
See the Call for Participation for more details:
http://wikimania2010.wikimedia.org/wiki/CFP
Thank you for helping make Wikimania 2010 a successful event. :-)
See you in Gdansk, July 9-11!
With best regards,
Wikimania Team
--
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023
Wikimania is an annual global event devoted to Wikimedia projects
around the globe (including Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikinews,
Wiktionary, Wikispecies, Wikimedia Commons, and MediaWiki). The
conference is a community gathering, giving the editors, users
and developers of Wikimedia projects an opportunity to meet each
other, exchange ideas, report on research and projects, and
collaborate on the future of the projects. The conference is open
to the public, and is a chance for educators, researchers,
programmers and free culture activists who are interested in the
Wikimedia projects to learn more and share ideas about the
Wikimedia projects.
This year's conference will be held JULY 9-11, 2010 in Gdansk,
Poland at Polish Baltic Philharmonic. For more information, please
visit the official Wikimania 2010 site:
http://wikimania2010.wikimedia.org/
Wikimania 2010 will be a mix of submitted talks, open space
meetings, birds of a feather groups, and lightning talks.
Submissions will be discussed and selected in an informal process
on the wiki. If your submission is not added to the schedule, you
will still have many opportunities to bring topics forward
on-site.
IMPORTANT DATES
* Deadline for submitting workshop, tutorial, panel and
presentation proposals: May 20
* Notification of acceptance: May 25 (workshops), May 31
(panels, tutorials, presentations)
* All proposals and presentations will be welcome in the
Open Space track of the conference, whether or not they
are accepted in this initial process.
PROGRAM COMMITTEE
Submissions will be reviewed informally by a team of volunteers.
TRACKS
This year Wikimania will offer three tracks for submissions for
members of wiki communities and interested observers to share
their own experiences and thoughts and to present new ideas:
People and Community
The People and Community track provides a unique forum for
discussing topics related to people using/building wikis.
Relevant topics include, but are not restricted to, the
following:
* Wiki Community: Conflict resolution and community dynamics;
reputation and identity;
* Wiki Outreach: Promotion of wikis and Wikimedia projects among
the general public;
* North meets south, east meets west: How can people of a
different cultural background create an encyclopedia according
to common rules? Same subject in the eye of different cultures.
* Special: Wikipedia in Central/Eastern Europe: this theme will
provide a forum to present and discuss the latest progress of
Wikis in the central/eastern European community.
Knowledge and Collaboration
The Knowledge and Collaboration track aims to promote research
and find exciting ideas related to knowledge...
* Wiki Content: New ways to improve content quality, credibility;
legal issues and copyrights (is free knowledge free?); use of
the content in education, journalism, research;
* Semantic Wikis: The use of semantic web technologies, linked
data; semantic annotation and metadata (in particular manual
vs. automated approaches).
Infrastructure Track
The Infrastructure track at Wikimania will provide a forum where
both researchers and practitioners can share new approaches,
applications, and explore how to make Wiki access ever more
ubiquitous:
* MediaWiki development: issues related to MediaWiki development
and extensions;
* Moving beyond MediaWiki: what other Wiki-like platforms exist;
what tools and features do we need for collaboration on
different types of knowledge?
* Mobile Wikis: The Web is moving off the desktop and into mobile
phones, how we use wikis on mobile devices?; wiki-based
Augmented Reality (AR) applications, location based services
* User Interface Design: Usability and user experience;
accessibility, adaptive interfaces and personalization; novel
UI designs.
WIKISYM 2010
Please note that Wikimania 2010 is co-located with WikiSym, The
International Symposium on Wikis and Open Collaboration. More
information about WikiSym can be found on the conference website:
http://www.wikisym.org/
SUBMIT A PROPOSAL
To submit a proposal for a presentation, workshop, panel or
tutorial, please visit:
http://bit.ly/Submit2010
Thank you for helping make Wikimania 2010 a successful event. :-)
See you in Gdansk, July 9-11!
--
Marcin Cieslak
Wikimania 2010 Gdansk