[Foundation-l] foundation-l Digest, Vol 38, Issue 101

Wed May 30 15:30:48 UTC 2007

Please for the love of God STOP SENDING ME EMAILS!!!
On May 29, 2007, at 1:46 PM, foundation-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org  
wrote:

> Send foundation-l mailing list submissions to
> 	foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	foundation-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	foundation-l-owner at lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of foundation-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: Meta Ban (Alex Newman)
>    2. Re: Wikikids (Nicholas Moreau)
>    3. Re: Wikikids (Angela)
>    4. Re: Wikikids (teun spaans)
>    5. Re: Meta Ban (Azdiyy)
>    6. Re: Wikikids (Mathias)
>    7. Re: Wikikids (Samuel Klein)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:20:48 +0100
> From: "Alex Newman" <alex9891 at hotmail.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban
> To: foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID: <BAY119-F21F2A735C12BF8C0B022468B2F0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
>
> Azdiyy wrote:
>> Hello,
>> Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if they
>> think their ban on meta is unjustified.
>>
>> trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others)
>> led nowhere.
>> m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if meta is
>> not suitable
>> for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too  
>> much imo.
>>
>> many thanks,
>> azdiyy
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>
> Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not  
> Meta. Maybe
> your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually looked  
> at all
> your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather  
> unsuitable
> to me.
>
> Alex (Majorly)
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> New, exclusive and FREE - Download Madonna's "Hey You" now!
> http://www.liveearth.msn.com
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 10:17:34 -0400
> From: "Nicholas Moreau" <nicholasmoreau at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Message-ID:
> 	<2540ad290705290717u3e8d6658o378f8bba60ccbd2c at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and the
> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
> notes:
>
> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>
> which means:
>
> "USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO THIS
> END AUTHORISATION!"
>
> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>
> Nick
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 15:41:14 +0100
> From: Angela <beesley at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> 	<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<8b722b800705290741l46e9a095k4af5cecbe0fc43c4 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and  
>> the
>> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
>> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
>> notes:
>>
>> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
>> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>
> This is just the default message in MediaWiki. You can see the same
> thing in the original version of the Dutch Wikipedia -
> http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? 
> title=MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning&oldid=178550
>
>> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
>> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
>> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>
> The wiki is GFDL. The edit page links to
> http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:Auteursrechten which
> says that the text on Wikikids is released under the same licence as
> on Wikipedia, namely the GFDL.
>
> Angela
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:44:04 +0200
> From: "teun spaans" <teun.spaans at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> 	<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<8fb899d70705290744g577e2797p451de62dca21db72 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> This is just a warning that users should not use copyrighted  
> material unless
> they have permission.
>
> It is a bit out of sight, but another page says:
> De teksten op Wikikids worden vrijgegeven onder dezelfde licentie  
> als op
> Wikipedia <http://nl.wikipedia.org/>, namelijk de
> GFDL-licentie<http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html>
> The texts on wikikids are being made available under the same  
> license as
> Wikipeda, that is the GFDL license.
>
> I wish you health and happiness,
> teun spaans
>
>
> On 5/29/07, Nicholas Moreau <nicholasmoreau at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On this topic, I find it disappointing (at least in the footer and  
>> the
>> "English explanation of WikiKids") that Kennisnet hasn't made the
>> project's content available under a free license. On edit pages it
>> notes:
>>
>> "GEBRUIK GEEN MATERIAAL DAT BESCHERMD WORDT DOOR AUTEURSRECHT, TENZIJ
>> JE DAARTOE TOESTEMMING HEBT!"
>>
>> which means:
>>
>> "USE NO MATERIAL WHICH IS PROTECTED COPYRIGHT, UNLESS YOU HAVE TO  
>> THIS
>> END AUTHORISATION!"
>>
>> But beyond shooing away plagiarism, there doesn't seem to be any
>> obvious mention. They've even removed the default mention of the GNU
>> FDL that appears by default on Wikia hosted wikis.
>>
>> Nick
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 16:25:48 +0100
> From: Azdiyy <azdiyy at googlemail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Meta Ban
> To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List"
> 	<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<6af34c650705290825k5479f911n8ae92ca2339dc15e at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
>
> if they're unsuitable, what about warning the 'offender' or a short  
> ban?
> Azdiyy
>
> On 29/05/07, Alex Newman <alex9891 at hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Azdiyy wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>> Sorry if i'm in the wrong place, but i wonder what one can do if  
>>> they
>>> think their ban on meta is unjustified.
>>>
>>> trying to talk to the blocking admin by email or irc (and to others)
>>> led nowhere.
>>> m:user:Azdiyy was blocked indef on may 24 with no warning. if  
>>> meta is
>>> not suitable
>>> for my postings i am willing to learn. but an indef ban is too  
>>> much imo.
>>>
>>> many thanks,
>>> azdiyy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Guillom said to complain about users on the individual wiki, not  
>> Meta. Maybe
>> your postings were not suitable for Meta (I haven't actually  
>> looked at all
>> your edits, but your most recent ones on talk pages seem rather  
>> unsuitable
>> to me.
>>
>> Alex (Majorly)
>>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 19:19:42 +0200
> From: Mathias <mathias.damour at laposte.net>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> 	<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <465C60AE.D7FA4210 at laposte.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi,
>
> Robert Horning a ?crit :
>>
>> mathias.damour wrote:
>>> Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and
>>> offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
>>> want children to be involved in building this content. We want
>>> to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
>>> See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
>>
>> I have serious doubts about the ability of children to get  
>> involved in
>> this process, other than to the extent that they already are involved
>> with Wikimedia projects.  There are minors (including some that have
>> administrator access... as discussed in some earlier threads) who are
>> involved with Wikipedia content (and a few I suspected on  
>> Wikibooks as
>> well), but these tend to be kids that are exceptionally  
>> motivated.  And
>> they participate on Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects as  
>> peers to
>> everybody else who is a contributor, with no special distinction.   
>> While
>> the idea of having kids write for kids sounds appealing on paper, a
>> bunch of 4th graders write like... well... a bunch of 4th  
>> graders.  They
>> are still trying to learn the basic mechanics of writing, and  
>> ought to
>> be learning how to write from those who have already mastered the  
>> skill,
>> not from those who are still apprentices in the subject.  I  
>> digress if
>> you think some contributors on Wikipedia don't know how to write, but
>> that more or less proves my point as well.
>
> It would be nice to have a feed-back from those who are involved in  
> the
> Wikikids.nl project on this point.
> I would say a few things :
> - We choosed not to make special distinction related to age on  
> Vikidia (no
> more than on Wikipedia). It is just asked that if you tell your age  
> on your
>  user page, you shouldn't cheat about it, just as you shouldn't  
> cheat about
>  your Diploma/academic degree on Wikipedia. (It's written in the  
> disclaimer
>  that a user could be blocked if he cheat about his age, but that you
> shouldn't assumed that it has been checked.)
> - 8-13 years is the readers target age. They are welcomed to edit, but
> adults so as - say - 13-18 years are welcomed too. We could guess that
> quite a lot of these (teenagers) could be willing to edit in a  
> wiki, but
> don't feel able to do it on Wikipedia. They can be pleased to do it  
> for
> younger people. That's what happen on Vikidia, where teenage  
> editors are
> quite importants.
> - it seems that children are not able to write as much as older  
> people,
> but they could do a quite good job on one subject. Anyway, it's a  
> wiki so
> their articles are to be bettered by others (which can be formative  
> to them).
>  They can aslo get involved in maintenance task (internal links...)  
> which
> make them become active readers rather than only content recipient.
> Participation of children is nevertheless something like a pillar for
> these wikis.
>
>> What I'm trying to point out is that those who are involved with
>> Wikijunior were not even contacted about this idea in the first place
>> when the idea was originally brought up on Meta, and suggestions  
>> on Meta
>> to look at the Wikijunior project as perhaps something to work  
>> with were
>> met with incredible hostility by those suggesting this Wikikids
>> project.  This doesn't have to be an either-or situation, as I  
>> believe
>> the sum is healthier than the individual parts alone.
>
> I'm not sure I understand well ; "This doesn't have to be an either-or
> situation" do you mean that they can be book for children AND  
> adults on
> Wikibooks, or that they can be wikibooks AND an encyclopedia for  
> children.
> That's what I would say.
>
>> I am presuming that you are writing about this because you want to  
>> seek
>> input from the Wikimedia community, and would like to enlist  
>> support for
>> those who might want to get involved with a project of this  
>> nature.  I'm
>> merely suggesting here that there are individuals who may want to  
>> join
>> in this sort of project, and you should try to join with these  
>> efforts.
>> There have been some attempts in the past to move Wikijunior to a
>> completely separate project and domain name, including forming
>> Wikijunior as a completely independent Wikimedia sister project.   
>> One of
>> these proposals, and not rejected by the Wikijunior community, was to
>> move to a more Wikipedia-like format of articles rather than the  
>> themed
>> collections organized into books such as currently exist on  
>> Wikibooks.
>> Please ask those involved with the development of Wikijunior to at  
>> least
>> comment on your ideas.  For English Wikijunior, the best place is at
>> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Talk:Wikijunior
>>
>> What all this concept is lacking is a very motivated leader who is
>> willing to take the next step and demonstrate that there is a large
>> concensus among those want to go this route.  And unlike the problems
>> that existed with Wikiversity on Wikibooks, there is virtually nobody
>> who wants to see Wikijunior "kicked off" of Wikibooks.  Wikijunior
>> enjoys a nearly independent existence without having to worry  
>> about the
>> project overhead of maintaining a separate group of admins, and a
>> strongly symbiotic relationship exists as well between Wikibooks and
>> Wikijunior to bring new users and contributors to both projects.  I
>> think that Wikijunior would struggle with a great many issues if  
>> it had
>> an independent existence at the moment that it doesn't have to worry
>> about right now.
>
> I had a look to the wikijunior pages in english and french. On the  
> english
> talk page, the topic on a separated website is about either a read- 
> only
> website for safe reading for children, or a separate wikibooks. I can
> understand that if wikijunior should still aim to writes books,  
> there is
> no determining utility to make a separate wiki for it.
> But the wikikids idea is quite different, since it has a "Wikipedia- 
> like
> format" as you say, and for it aims to let children write on it.
>
> I don't know if wikijunior could (and would like) to move to that, and
> anyway "This doesn't have to be an either-or situation" ;-)
>
> Mathias Damour
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 13:49:11 -0400 (EDT)
> From: Samuel Klein <meta.sj at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] Wikikids
> To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
> 	<foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org>
> Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0705291321090.25804 at hera.hcs.harvard.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="x-unknown"
>
>
> There are a few issues here, which should perhaps be addressed by more
> than one project.
>
> 1) Simplifying language
>
> Finding a way to provide versions of articles targeted at different
> audiences -- different levels of jargon or language complexity --  
> would
> be a valuable achievement.  Our early effort with Simple-English  
> remains
> a hack which needs improvement and localization.
>
> Examples: simple english, simple spanish
>
>
> 2) Writing for children
>
> There is a long tradition of providing children with books about the
> world, including drawings, games, and activities; with a shift in  
> focus,
> layout, and tone from more general encyclopedias.  At the same time, I
> believe that most full-length English encyclopedias have for  
> decades been
> primarily marketed for home use by schoolchildren...
>
> Examples: Andrew Cates' SOS selection of Wikipedia
>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Wikipedia_CD_Selection
> Wikijunior
>    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikijunior
>
>
> 3) Projects by and for children
>
> There is a need for space for younger authors to develop and share  
> their
> own work.  This may or may not be directly related to one of the above
> projects.
>
> Examples:  Few.  UNICEF's Voices of Youth project offers some space  
> for
> this sort of collaboration among their young contributors.
>
>
> 4) Packaging things into books v. ongoing development of articles
>
> This has been a slightly confusing distinction since we started  
> putting
> 'books' into digital form, breaking the traditions of bound and  
> printed
> works one by one.  There are useful distinctions b/t wikipedia and
> wikibooks, and likewise between a children's encyclopedia idea and
> wikijunior, but they are as much philosophical as unavoidable.  This
> is especially true as books become more and more modular, and parts of
> books are used in multiple works.
>
>
> -----
>
> It would be good to start a discussion and collaboration including
> interested groups... and to seed a children's encyclopedia with  
> some of
> the existing material that is in other formats.
>
> The advantage to 3) over the others is that projects whose primary
> audience can contribute directly to their development have an  
> excellent
> model for sustained growth.
>
> SJ
>
>
> On Mon, 28 May 2007, mathias.damour wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Robert Horning wrote:
>>>
>>> Mathias wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Such a wiki has been launched in french (in which I am
>> involved) see an english explanation about it:
>> http://fr.vikidia.org/index.php/Vikidia:About and in Dutch
>> (see
>> http://kennisnet.wikia.com/wikikids/wiki/Wikikids:English_explanation
>> None of them are Wikimedia project.)
>>>> Both have a quite active community and have reached 1000
>> articles.
>>>
>>> (...)
>>> And Wikijunior is also quite multilingual, with some sort of
>>> Wikijunior project on nearly every language edition of
>> Wikibooks,
>>> including French, German, Italian, Spanish, Chinese, and
>> English.  In
>>> many cases these "articles" or "modules" have been translated or
>>> rewritten in multiple languages as well, especially the original
>>> Wikijunior books of the Solar System and the Big Cats.
>>>
>>> And Wikijunior is clearly a Wikimedia project in its own
>> right, other
>>> than it is hosted concurrently with Wikibooks.  Try
>>> http://en.wikijunior.org/ to see where the wikijunior domain
>> goes.
>>>
>>> This isn't to say that some effort shouldn't happen to
>> perhaps expand
>>> the range of this proposal, but it seems like the largest
>> problem it has
>>> faced is an ever fragmenting community and leaders who
>> havn't had the
>>> desire to keep the project moving.  Writing literary content for
>>> children is not an easy task, and it takes a focused
>> community to keep
>>> the project growing.
>>
>> Wikijunior is clearly a wikibooks project. I mean that it is
>> not a Wikipedia-like project, and being hosted on the
>> wikibooks wiki makes impossible several feature of Wikipedia.
>> For example you can't make easy internal wikilinks : wikilink
>> to "Aluminum" is not [[Aluminum]] but [[Wikijunior The
>> Elements/Aluminum]]. The "oxygen" page:
>> http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikijunior_The_Elements/Oxygen
>> should only tell about the element, not the dioxygen gas. (it
>> does indeed, and doesn't make it clear between one and the
>> other) and it doesn't make it easy to create another page
>> about the gas, since this wikibooks is about the elements.
>>
>> Another point is that Wikijunior "only" aims to produce and
>> offer content for children whereas Wikikids.nl and Vikidia
>> want children to be involved in building this content. We want
>> to let them be active with knowledge for pedagogical interest.
>> See this article : http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Writing-to-learn
>>
>> I don't think that "fragmenting community and leaders" is a
>> real danger now that several Wikipedia have reached such a
>> huge size both in articles and in editors.
>>
>> Some people have had the idea to make either special articles
>> or a special wiki for children of each grade, or even for each
>> grade AND each school. (because you would have to explain in a
>> different way to a 9 years old child than to a 12 years old)
>> see this discusion:
>> http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Talk:Wikis_for_children) I feel that
>> it would be "fragmenting community" and that one single
>> encyclopedic wiki for 8 to 13 year old children and for one
>> language is a fair middle.
>>
>>
>>> As for the health of Wikijunior books, many of them have reached
>>> "featured book" status as some of the "best of..."
>> Wikibooks, and on
>>> en.wikbooks I would say that you could easily get much more
>> than 1000
>>> modules that could easily seed an en.wikikids project.  Many
>> of these
>>> modules could on their own reach featured article status on
>>> en.wikipedia, but for the fact they are not on Wikipedia.
>> Rather than
>>> try to dissect what went wrong with the previous attempt at
>> an English
>>> language version of this project, I would suggest that you
>> try and see
>>> what has been done "right" by Wikijunior and its development
>> community.
>>> And certainly try to pool the efforts of this "Wikikids"
>> group and those
>>> who are writing "Wikijunior" content.  I have not seen any
>> effort to
>>> recruit those involved with Wikijunior to help with this
>> proposal in any
>>> meaningful way.
>>
>> Do you tell about this attempt ?
>> http://editthis.info/wikikidsen/Main_Page I didn't look at it
>> closely, but I am afraid that it wasn't lead in a proper way.
>> Another think is that there is "simple english wikipedia",
>> whom no other equivalent have been created in any other
>> language. I guess that it would make less easy to create a
>> wikikids in english, as it would be partly similar to simple,
>> and I would also say that the fact that this wiki is not so
>> big and hasn't been created in other language may show that
>> its aim would not be so clear, mobilizing and justifying.
>>
>> The idea to seed from wikijunior could be good, so as the idea
>> to create such wiki on the Vikidia and Wikikids.nl model.
>> I can't say about Wikikids.nl, but if by chance they would be
>> some encyclopedic wikis dedicated to children to open in other
>> language, Vikidia (in french) would rather become a wikimedia
>> project and work on it together than see them created by
>> isolated groups in each language.
>>
>> Hope to hear from you,
>>
>> Mathias Damour
>>
>> Cr?ez votre adresse ?lectronique prenom.nom at laposte.net
>> 1 Go d'espace de stockage, anti-spam et anti-virus int?gr?s.
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
> End of foundation-l Digest, Vol 38, Issue 101
> *********************************************