headers
Anthere | 1 Apr 2006 11:14
Picon
Favicon

Re: Redémarrage du Wikiquote Francophone / French Wikiquote Relaunch

Thanks Brion and all who worked to fix the whole wikiquote issue.

Maybe we did not choose the best date...

Ant

Brion Vibber wrote:
> Jean-Baptiste Soufron wrote:
> 
>>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.
> 
> 
> fr.wikiquote.org est maintenant effacé.
> 
> Le nouveau site serait relancé si existe des participants...
> 
> 
> 
>>After analyzing the data contained in the fr.wikiquote site, the  
>>Wikimedia Foundation has determined that the material stored in the  
>>fr.wikiquote database does not provide the basic assurance of legal  
>>soundness necessary to the permanence of the project. Therefore, the  
>>site will be entirely taken down to be erased and relaunched.
> 
> 
> fr.wikiquote.org has now been taken down.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Jean-Christophe Chazalette | 1 Apr 2006 13:04
Picon

Re: Redémarrage du Wikiquote Francophone / French Wikiquote Relaunch

You 're probably the only one in the world to celebrate April's fool on
March 31 then, flo :p
villy

Le 01/04/06, Anthere <Anthere9@...> a écrit :
>
> Thanks Brion and all who worked to fix the whole wikiquote issue.
>
>
> Maybe we did not choose the best date...
>
> Ant
>
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Robert Scott Horning | 1 Apr 2006 15:14
Favicon

Re: [WikiEN-l] Meta:MetaProject to Overhaul Meta

Lars Aronsson wrote:

>David Gerard wrote:
>  
>
>>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 
>>archaeological rubble.
>>    
>>
>
>Can anyone please explain to me what "work" means here?
>
>One of the archaic pages on meta is 
>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikispecies
>which hasn't really changed much since September 2004. The project 
>proposal is dead, nobody works on it.  There are few better 
>examples of dead meat on meta.
>
>The current proposal to "overhaul" meta seems to suggest that the 
>Wikispecies page could be simply deleted.  Is that correct?
>
>Then next month, someone can come to this new, fresh and 
>legacy-free meta to do "work", for example by suggesting a new 
>project called Wikispecies.  Since there is no previous mentioning 
>of this idea, it must be new.  Brave new world!
>
>If I'm missing something here, perhaps a better explanation
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Robert Scott Horning | 1 Apr 2006 15:28
Favicon

Re: Rodovid.org, family tree wiki, wishes to become a wiki project

Benjamin Webb wrote:

>What about if you wanted to have yourself on a family tree could you do
>that? (See my prewious comment)
>
>On 31/03/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning@...> wrote:
>  
>
>>Ray Saintonge wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Simply asking a person's permission would simply lead to chaos.  The
>>>person whom you ask may agree, but his brother may not.  A 110 year rule
>>>may be a little excessive.  The US census, for example, is in the public
>>>domain after 72 years.  BMD announcements in newspapers are all a matter
>>>of public record; telephone directories, property tax records and the
>>>Social Security Death Index are all publicly available sources of
>>>information.
>>>
>>>Ec
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>The point of the 110 rule is that it does fit with almost all known
>>privacy laws throughout the world, and for geneological research
>>purposes is generally not that big of an inconvience. 
>>
Yourself, perhaps.  I understand in part that you want to show a full
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 5 comments |
headers
Ray Saintonge | 1 Apr 2006 20:53

Re: [WikiEN-l] Meta:MetaProject to Overhaul Meta

Robert Scott Horning wrote:

>In the case of Wikispecies, we need to keep that around as a historical 
>reminder to find out just what went wrong with that proposal, and why 
>did the project turn out so poorly. Negative examples are just as 
>important as positive examples of project pages like the Wikinews or 
>Wikibooks pages on Meta.  So are you proposing to delete the Wikinews 
>page as well, since the project is already up and running and no longer 
>needs the page on Meta?  The logic is identical here other than a few 
>more recent edits have happened on the Wikinews page instead.
>
I don't think that it is fair to say that Wikispecies has turned out 
poorly.  I just checked the RC there and there were over 250 entries in 
the last 24 hours.  Is that doing poorly?

Ec
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Robert Scott Horning | 1 Apr 2006 21:14
Favicon

Re: Rodovid.org, family tree wiki, wishes to become a wiki project

Benjamin Webb wrote:

>>I completely agree that this is a sticky issue.  I'm just suggesting
>>that some thought needs to go into it and I'm also suggesting what other
>>groups are doing who publish geneological information in a public forum.
>>
>>--
>>Robert Scott Horning
>>
>
>I understand the need for being cautious about security and I think that
>your comment that the subject is something that needs to be thought hard
>about is exactly right. However, there's one thing that I have been
>wondering about. You have raised the point that identity theft could be
>carried out, using the mother's maiden name. As, Rodovid grows and the
>number of people with the same increases, it will be difficult to link a
>person whose identity you are trying to steal with someone on the database.
>To do this would mean having other data such as age, place of birth and so
>on, which would probably be as difficult to obtain as  the maiden name.
>  
>
Of course you are publishing such information like:

http://en.rodovid.org/wk/Person%3A1114

That is the kind of information that you are collecting, so having that 
basic information like age, place of birth, and where you likely are 
living would be available, which with a little bit of extra work is all 
you need to steal somebody's identity.
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Robert Scott Horning | 1 Apr 2006 21:21
Favicon

Re: [WikiEN-l] Meta:MetaProject to Overhaul Meta

Ray Saintonge wrote:

>Robert Scott Horning wrote:
>
>  
>
>>In the case of Wikispecies, we need to keep that around as a historical 
>>reminder to find out just what went wrong with that proposal, and why 
>>did the project turn out so poorly. Negative examples are just as 
>>important as positive examples of project pages like the Wikinews or 
>>Wikibooks pages on Meta.  So are you proposing to delete the Wikinews 
>>page as well, since the project is already up and running and no longer 
>>needs the page on Meta?  The logic is identical here other than a few 
>>more recent edits have happened on the Wikinews page instead.
>>
>>    
>>
>I don't think that it is fair to say that Wikispecies has turned out 
>poorly.  I just checked the RC there and there were over 250 entries in 
>the last 24 hours.  Is that doing poorly?
>
>Ec
>  
>

Compared to similar projects that have been around for the same length 
of time, its Alexa ranking, and the fact that it is linked prominently 
on the front page of every Wikimedia sister project, yeah, it isn't 
doing as well as it could or should be doing.  I don't want to open the 
can of worms about the project status of Wikispecies, but there are some
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Ray Saintonge | 1 Apr 2006 21:34

Re: Rodovid.org, family tree wiki, wishes to become a wiki project

Benjamin Webb wrote:

>On 01/04/06, Robert Scott Horning <robert_horning@...> wrote:
>  
>
>>Yourself, perhaps.  I understand in part that you want to show a full
>>family tree starting with yourself and going to your ancestors (or
>>decendants if you are older).  The problem here is that this information
>>is all going to be publicly available for anybody to use and have
>>access.  Indeed, a very, very common "security question" used to help
>>prevent identity theft is to ask what your mother's maiden name was.  By
>>publishing full geneological links in a public place like on a Wikimedia
>>project, you are inviting fraud, identity theft, and violation of
>>several personal privacy laws.  With the Wikimedia Foundation so
>>paranoid about something so insignificant as an IP address connected to
>>a user account and the hyper paranoid (in my opinion) check user policy,
>>this might be enough to kill this whole proposal completely in terms of
>>violating privacy laws.
>>
>>More important, the suggestion here is that other living relatives may
>>also be listed if a policy like this isn't implemented.  They did not
>>give concent to have their information posted in a public forum, even if
>>on a technical level the information is available through public records
>>like birth certificates and driver's license registrations.
>>
>>I completely agree that this is a sticky issue.  I'm just suggesting
>>that some thought needs to go into it and I'm also suggesting what other
>>groups are doing who publish geneological information in a public forum.
>>    
>>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |
headers
Anthere | 2 Apr 2006 00:26
Picon
Favicon

Re: Redémarrage du Wikiquote Francophone / French Wikiquote Relaunch

I have not changed yet all my watches, nor the cell phone....

Jean-Christophe Chazalette wrote:
> You 're probably the only one in the world to celebrate April's fool on
> March 31 then, flo :p
> villy
> 
> 
> Le 01/04/06, Anthere <Anthere9@...> a écrit :
> 
>>Thanks Brion and all who worked to fix the whole wikiquote issue.
>>
>>
>>Maybe we did not choose the best date...
>>
>>Ant
>>
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Phoebe Ayers | 2 Apr 2006 03:49
Picon

Wikimania 2006 CfP - deadline extension

Hello,
The deadline for submitting proposals to the Wikimania 2006 conference
has been extended, to April 15 for workshop and tutorial submissions,
and April 30 for presentation submissions.

For more information, visit http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org. The
Call for Participation is attached below.
------

Call for Participation -- Wikimania 2006 -- Aug. 4 - Aug. 6, Cambridge, MA

About Wikimania

Wikimania is an annual global event devoted to Wikipedia and other
Wikimedia projects. It is both a scientific conference and a community
event, open to the public. Wikimania is a place for users and editors
of the projects to gather from around the globe, to meet each other,
to exchange ideas, and to report on research and projects. This year's
conference will be held from 4-6 August, 2006, on the Harvard Law
School campus in Cambridge, Massachusetts. See
http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org for more information.

We are accepting submissions for papers, posters, presentations,
workshops, and discussion groups. We are also accepting nominations
for speakers and speaker panels, and suggestions for other activities.
Everyone is welcome to submit abstracts and ideas. Be bold in your
submissions!
-----
Important dates:
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane