Announcing... CommonsTicker

Hello,

CommonsTicker is a special tool created by
(commons:,meta:,:de:w:)User:Duesentrieb to allow for greater
communication and transparency between the Commons and local projects
(all projects, all languages) that use the Commons. When it is set up,
a log page is created and a bot posts updates about any critical
events that occur to any Commons images that are being used by that
project. Critical events are: image replacement (a new version of an
image being uploaded over the top of an existing one), an image being
marked or unmarked with a deletion tag (including no source, etc), and
an image being deleted.

This allows local project users to immediately identify any images
that have been nominated for deletion, giving them plenty of notice to
take part in the deletion discussion, as well as checking that image
replacements are not vandalism and removing any red links from deleted
images.

CommonsTicker is completely translatable (if you provide a
translation). All it needs to be set up is a project admin to
"sponsor" it through the early days. Now taking requests! :)

http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Duesentrieb/CommonsTicker :
instructions on set-up, contact, translation, request queue
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:CommonsTicker : Example
Ticker in English
(There are also Tickers already set up in German, Indonesian, Italian,
Dutch, Chinese and Slovak.)

Use of this mailing list...

Just wondering if this list gets very much use.  Any ideas?  Wouldn't
this be the appropriate place for the whole "game guides" discussion?
Thanks.
--LV

Re: Use of this mailing list...

Dnia Thu, 01 Jun 2006 18:38:23 +0200, Lord Voldemort napisał(a):

> Just wondering if this list gets very much use.  Any ideas?  Wouldn't
> this be the appropriate place for the whole "game guides" discussion?
> Thanks.
> --LV

No, such debate should be completely public, only a small number of people use this list. I see this list as
place for perhaps some less formal discussions (like commenting important articles and blog entries
about Wikibooks) and cross-project coordination (like informing about new MediaWiki features). Some
of these topic should be forwarded to staff lounge or bulletin board, but there are many topics that are
irrelevant for most users (like very specific software changes or discussing blog entries).

--

-- 
Piotr 'Derbeth' Kubowicz
Derbeth Site <http://derbeth.glt.pl>
Jabber id: derbeth@...

Pomóż Wikibooks stworzyć największy zbiór otwartych podręczników! http://pl.wikibooks.org/

Opera - the fastest browser on Earth! http://www.opera.com/

Re: Use of this mailing list...

On 6/1/06, Piotr Derbeth Kubowicz <derbeth@...> wrote:
> Dnia Thu, 01 Jun 2006 18:38:23 +0200, Lord Voldemort napisał(a):
>
> > Just wondering if this list gets very much use.  Any ideas?  Wouldn't
> > this be the appropriate place for the whole "game guides" discussion?
> > Thanks.
> > --LV
>
> No, such debate should be completely public, only a small number of people use this list. I see this list as
place for perhaps some less formal discussions (like commenting important articles and blog entries
about Wikibooks) and cross-project coordination (like informing about new MediaWiki features). Some
of these topic should be forwarded to staff lounge or bulletin board, but there are many topics that are
irrelevant for most users (like very specific software changes or discussing blog entries).
>

Seems fine.  I just know that for Wikipedia, at least, overall topics
not dealing with the encyclopedia, such as some policy work, is not
supposed to happen on-wiki.  That is what meta and the mailing list
was for.  I didn't know if it would be better to be having, at least
part of, the discussions there.  Oh well.
--LV

Re: Use of this mailing list...

Lord Voldemort wrote:

>Just wondering if this list gets very much use.  Any ideas?  Wouldn't
>this be the appropriate place for the whole "game guides" discussion?
>Thanks.
>--LV
>
>  
>
Not that there was much community input sought before any action took 
place anyway with the game guides policies.

--

-- 
Robert Scott Horning

Re: Use of this mailing list...

Lord Voldemort wrote:
> Just wondering if this list gets very much use.  Any ideas?  Wouldn't
> this be the appropriate place for the whole "game guides" discussion?
> Thanks.

It would be great for me if it were, since I get a ton more work done
when I am offline than when I am online.

_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l@...
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l

Re: Use of this mailing list...

On 6/1/06, Piotr Derbeth Kubowicz <derbeth@...> wrote:
> No, such debate should be completely public, only a small number of
> people use this list.

We should publicize the list, then.  A lot of policy discussions work
much better in email that on wiki, in my experience.

_______________________________________________
Textbook-l mailing list
Textbook-l@...
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l

Game Guides

Okay, Jimbo.  In an effort to discuss the game guides issue, I would
appreciate a couple of questions being answered.  I will try to
address various points people have brought up on the subject of game
guides as well as Wikibooks (WB) as a whole.  I will try to ask them
in a broad sense, including questions that may seem obvious to some.
Bear with me.

1. What was the original purpose of Wikibooks?

2. Is the current purpose the same?

3. Who has control over the overall content of Wikibooks? The
Wikimedia Foundation, the WMF Board, the community of Wikibookians?

4a. Some time ago now, you declared that game guides did not fit with
the intent of WB.  Were you speaking on behalf of the Wikimedia
Foundation?  Were you speaking just as Jimbo?

4b. Who decided all of a sudden to rid Wikibooks of game guides?  Was
there recent discussion on Meta?  Between the Board?  If so, is there
a record of this discussion?

5. Why specifically do game guides not fit in Wikibooks?  Are there
possible tax-exemption implications with having these here?  If so,
where is the information regarding this?

6. If the community of Wikibookians disagrees with the decision, and
consensus is formed against it, can the community disregard the
pronouncement?

Re: Game Guides

Under full assumption of good faith of everyone involved, I would also
like to say that I find the fact that 3 out of 5 current Wikimedia
Board members (or 3 of 4 active ones) are founders of or working for
the for-profit Wikia.com, which hosts gameinfo.wikia.com (a wiki for
the kind of game guides that are being removed from Wikibooks),
somewhat problematic. Jimmy himself going into Wikibooks and
effectively making policy is even more worrying (I know he would argue
that it's been policy all along, but the fact is that these guides
would be sticking there without higher intervention).

There's another GFDL wiki out there, strategywiki.net, for these kinds
of guides. Given that StartegyWiki is more active than GameInfo
anyway, I would be more comfortable with the whole situation if Wikia
made a deliberate decision of its own to move guides from GameInfo to
StrategyWiki. It seems like a good free content thing to do (build
communities wherever there's the most activity), and would alleviate
concerns about outside appearance of the whole thing.

I also reiterate my suggestion to rename Wikibooks to WikiTextbooks.

Erik

Re: Game Guides

Lord Voldemort wrote:

>Okay, Jimbo.  In an effort to discuss the game guides issue, I would
>appreciate a couple of questions being answered.  I will try to
>address various points people have brought up on the subject of game
>guides as well as Wikibooks (WB) as a whole.  I will try to ask them
>in a broad sense, including questions that may seem obvious to some.
>Bear with me.
>
>1. What was the original purpose of Wikibooks?
>
>2. Is the current purpose the same?
>
>3. Who has control over the overall content of Wikibooks? The
>Wikimedia Foundation, the WMF Board, the community of Wikibookians?
>
>4a. Some time ago now, you declared that game guides did not fit with
>the intent of WB.  Were you speaking on behalf of the Wikimedia
>Foundation?  Were you speaking just as Jimbo?
>
>4b. Who decided all of a sudden to rid Wikibooks of game guides?  Was
>there recent discussion on Meta?  Between the Board?  If so, is there
>a record of this discussion?
>
>5. Why specifically do game guides not fit in Wikibooks?  Are there
>possible tax-exemption implications with having these here?  If so,
>where is the information regarding this?
>
>6. If the community of Wikibookians disagrees with the decision, and
>consensus is formed against it, can the community disregard the