Wikimedia-l March 2006

wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

78 participants
92 discussions

[Foundation-l] How to develop policy in a multilingual organization
by Elisabeth Bauer 01 Nov '06

01 Nov '06

"If you contribute to the Wikimedia projects, you are publishing every word you post publicly." german translation: "Wenn Sie zu den Wikimedia-Projekten beitragen, veröffentlichen Sie jedes Wort, das sie abschicken, öffentlich." That's the second sentence of our privacy policy, to be found on http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Privacy_policy and inspires me to loose a few words on how policy writing should be handled in a multilingual project: * Decide on the core principles of the … [View More]

3 3

[Foundation-l] .eu domains soon
by Jan Kulveit 30 Aug '06

30 Aug '06

Hi, the 1st sunrise period for .eu domain registration is going to begin soon - 7 December 2005 only domain names which are registred EU community/national trademarks will be registered. I'm not sure about the status of Wikimedia trademarks, but guess at least Wikipedia a Wikimedia are suitable. IMO "we" should apply at least for wikipedia.eu and wikimedia.eu. Because of trademark issues and eu regulations concernig who can apply for .eu, I'm affraid it will be a bit complicated. I hope … [View More]

7 8

[Foundation-l] Waerth's stewardship
by daniwo59＠aol.com 23 Apr '06

23 Apr '06

At the request of Oscar from the Netherlands wikipedia, I have temporarily removed Waerth's status as a Steward, pending the resolution of his conflict with the nl.wikipedia community. I do this with a heavy heart, and recognize that something like this has never been done before, however, it became necessary in order to thwart Waerth's threats to override his own block on nl.wiki. I would be grateful to receive the comments and suggestions of other stewards on this matter, … [View More]

5 6

[Foundation-l] Rodovid.org, family tree wiki, wishes to become a wiki project
by Benjamin Webb 03 Apr '06

03 Apr '06

I have not yet recived any real reply about this project. I would like to hear from someone whether it could actually become a wikimedia project, and what would need to happen before it could. Any comments would be apreciated. Benjamin Webb (User:Bjwebb on wikipedia, meta, commons, wikibooks, rodovid and wikitree) P.S. It has a meta page at http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Rodovid.org

14 64

Re: [Foundation-l] [WikiEN-l] Meta:MetaProject to Overhaul Meta
by David Gerard 02 Apr '06

02 Apr '06

> Can you give us a little more context? I can see that there is a >proposal to create a separate meta wiki just for the english >wikipedia, presumably because many things currently on meta.wikipedia >are not really applicable to other wikipedias? This isn't a proposal for an English meta at all. It was an attempt to make Meta actually useful as a cross-project work wiki, rather than a disorganised collection of historical documents with a few working pages camped out in the … [View More]

6 6

[Foundation-l] Hold on a moment, please.
by David Gerard 02 Apr '06

02 Apr '06

> This struck me as unnecessarily confrontational. The stream of abuse from those who consider themselves the guardians of Meta strikes me as unnecessarily confrontational, and I'm really not happy about it. When one of those is a Foundation board member, I'm even less happy about it. - d.

4 3

[Foundation-l] Instant Commons
by Anthere 02 Apr '06

02 Apr '06

ChitChat with David over whether there is a meta community ... or not... is nice, but let's get back to real business for a while :-) There is a proposal on meta : InstantCommons http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/InstantCommons I would be happy if some of you could have a look at it (if not at the technical details, at least to the general concept - it will not take you much time) and give a feedback about it (here or on meta or on irc). I am not looking for a comment by those who proposed … [View More]

4 3

[Foundation-l] Redémarrage du Wikiquote Francophone / French Wikiquote Relaunch
by Jean-Baptiste Soufron 02 Apr '06

02 Apr '06

Bonjour, Après avoir expertisé l'état des données contenues dans le site fr.wikiquote, la fondation Wikimedia considère que le matériel hébergé dans la base du site fr.wikiquote ne présente pas les garanties minimales de sûreté juridique nécessaires à la pérennité du projet. Le site va donc être entièrement repris pour être effacé et relancé. Une politique plus exigeante de traçabilité des citations mises en ligne sera instaurée sur la version II de fr.wikiquote. Cette décision a été … [View More]

9 11

[Foundation-l] Meta:MetaProject to Overhaul Meta
by Alex Schenck 31 Mar '06

31 Mar '06

Okay, apparently, we have a few problems here. Despite praise from various sources, several other Meta people have complained that this project is doing more harm than good. While I of course completely disagree with that notion, I feel that I ought to let out some steam. Meta right now is horrible. Really, it is. People need to stop kidding themselves and understand that the way that it is in right now is akin to a trash heap. Sure, there are some good things on Meta, but the vast majority … [View More]is unorganized rubbish that could probably be put away in an archive and forgotten about until cyber-archaeologists come along and sift through it and thing that they're artifacts. I mean, come on. Sure, this place has a lot of history of Wikimedia, but if things need to be kept, why can't they be kept in a more orderly fashion? Another thing: people have been complaining about speedy deletions and that they violate Meta policy. Can I be brutally honest? Meta is a ghost wiki and the policies aren't nearly as important as they are on local projects. When people start complaining that deletion of unused images such as pornography is out of process, I cringe. No one is going to miss some of these things. I understand that some people have objected to some things which I have deleted. However, those things can get restored, and besides, any project which requires a massive overhaul will experience errors. Frankly, I've got better things to do than completely overhaul Meta. I'm doing this for the greater good of Wikimedia's projects. People are afraid to touch Meta because it is a massive unorganized heap. I'm trying to change that, and I've gotten a go-ahead from the top. If people are going to complain that a policy on a nearly abandoned wiki is not followed over getting things, you know... accomplished (gee, what a thought), then why am I and thirteen other editors (two of which have decided to quit the project) wasting our time like this? For the meantime, I will continue this project, but I would like to propose a solution: an archive wiki of Meta. Move *everything* on Meta over to this archive. Start fresh. The archive will contain all things that Meta used to have, so nothing will just disappear, and someone else can go through the archive if they really feel like it and find whatever they're looking for. I promise I won't touch that archive. Plus, anything that is current can be kept on Meta as is. Let Meta be useful again instead of a depository of crap dotted with worthwhile discussions and essays. --Alex [View Less]

13 19

[Foundation-l] September 11 Wiki
by Benjamin Webb 31 Mar '06

31 Mar '06

What do people think about the September 11 Wiki. I don't really mind what happens with up, but have noticed the proposal<http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects#Closure_of_Septem…>as it is on the same page as the Rodovid one. If the project is wanted to be deleted, its content could be moved to Rodovid <http://rodovid.org> then the people who want it deleted will be happy, but the contents could be kept. What do you think? Benjamin Webb

2 1

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Wikimedia-l March 2006