Wikimedia Meta-Wiki

LSS/foundation-l-archives/2007 week 6/ja

< LSS‎ | foundation-l-archives‎ | 2007 week 6
2006
9月 10月
39 40•41•42•43•44
11月 12月
45•46•47•48 49•50•51•52
2007
1月 2月
1•2•3•4•5 6•7•8•9
3月 4月
10•11•12•13 14•15•16•17
5月 6月
18•19•20•21•22 23•24•25•26
7月 8月
27•28•29•30 31•32•33•34
9月 10月
35•36•37•38•39 40•41•42•43•44
11月 12月
45•46•47•48 49•50•51•52

Translations English (en)  - 日本語 (ja)

ここに掲げるのは、メーリングリストサマリサービス（LSS）の一部である Foundation-l の抜粋です。投稿者名のついた投稿メッセージにはアーカイブ中のメールへリンクを張っています。しかし、必ずしも全てのメッセージがアーカイブに保存されているわけではなく、アーカイブ自体が不安定でメッセージのURL自体が定期的に変更されてしまうことがあることから、リンク先が切れている場合があります。不正確な点についての修正を歓迎しますが、スタイルや報告の要点に関する修正についてはまずノートページで議論してから修正してください。サマリ中での投稿者に関する言及を、ウィキペディアのハンドルネームで呼ぶか、e-mailの名前を使うかは、それほど一貫したポリシーがあるわけではなく、時と場合によります。人称代名詞の性別は、たまに間違えていることがあります。


ここに掲げるのは（概ね）2007年2月5日-11日の内容である。

新規利用を歓迎する努力に伴う共通の問題があらゆるところに多過ぎることも説明した。こうした努力は新規参加者が共通して起こす失敗に焦点を当てるべきだと提案した。[2]RBはそのWikiで使う言語が分からない人への歓迎メッセージに「XXXXが分からなければこちらをご覧ください」というメモを加えることを提案した。議論はウィキペディアに既に親しみを持っている編集者やウィキメディアプロジェクト新規参加者のためのウィキへの招待やどのようにこの努力を成功に導くかに分けて進められた。この努力はCross-project comparisons/MediaWiki:Welcomecreation and Template:Welcome comparisonsで続いている。

  • [3] Robert Rohde informs the list that WMF logos, which are copyrighted, are being used on the wikis in places where a copyrighted images would not be acceptable. He asks in particular if promotion tools like banners are an appropriate use of WMF logos. Responses follow also asking for more clarification on this issue. [4] TOR explains that there are open-use community logos, although they are not widely recognized yet, atcommons:Category:Wikimedia Community Logos. [5] Anthere explains the logos will not be released under a free license because WMF needs to prevent misuse of the logos which could damage the image of WMF and it raises money by licensing these logos. [6] SJ asks if these two problems could not be solved with trademark protection for any misuse and a less restrictive license that allows money to be raised while still allowing derivatives for non-commercial use.
  • [7] Lennart informs the list of POV-fork of sv.WP, which he believes is similar enough in appearance to sv.WP to confuse people into believing they are connected. He asks for advice on how to protect the reputation of sv.WP from this "evil twin". [8] Robert Scott Horning suggests making certain they are following the GFDL and otherwise ignoring them, as they would likely be pleased by any attention.
  • [9] David Gerard asks for feedback about his efforts on enterprise article problems at w:Wikipedia:Contact us/Article problem/Factual error (from enterprise)
  • [10] Kat Walsh informs the list that a board resolution clarifying acceptable media license will forthcoming. She explains that the mission of the Wikimedia Foundation is to develop "free content", and must have no significant legal restriction on people's freedom to use, redistribute, or modify the content for any purpose. commons:Commons:Licensing discusses many licenses which are acceptable for this purpose. All media on Wikimedia sites which are used under terms that specify non-commercial use only, no-derivatives only, or permission for Wikimedia only, need to be be phased out and replaced with media that does not have these restrictions. Some Wikimedia projects use media that is not free at all, under a doctrine of "fair use" or "fair dealing". Because of WMF's commitment to free content, this non-free media should not be used when it is reasonably possible to replace with free media that would serve the same educational purpose. Individual projects may choose to be more restrictive than Foundation policy, but no project may have content policies less restrictive, or that allow licenses other than those allowed on Wikimedia Commons and limited fair use. [11] Brianna explains that attaching WMF policy to what is decided at on wiki (Commons) could be difficult, especially because of the close decisions made there on the issue of whether certain country-specific arguments for public domain are acceptable. She asks if the WMF will help by supplying some legal assistance from time to time for Commons? [12] Erik explains that the current draft resolution makes reference to the "[Definition of Free Cultural Works http://freedomdefined.org/Definition]" for the purpose of identifying free licenses rather than Commons. [13] (also other emails) Gatto Nero suggested this policy unfair because it allows the exemption they have used to host un-free content (which is not legally sound in Italy) while dis-allowing the exemption it.WP has been using (which is legally sound in Italy). [14] Marco explains it.WP can adapt by hosting images which use the "fair use" exemption to meet WMF policy and use other reasoning (such as a non-commercial license) to be compliant with the national laws.
  • [15]Robert Rohde informs the list that the last image dump for any project was November 2005, nearly 15 months ago; and feels that this denial of access is a much more fundamental strike against our freedom than the general debate around which images are free enough. [16] Brion informs the list that he got some new file servers in recently. He suggests less seriously that the dumps would be so huge that no one will actually be able to get or use them anyway. [17] Gregory Maxwell suggests that the dumps will be possible and much easier than downloading each of the images one by one. [18] SJ informs the list he is willing to provide dumps by mail at the cost of the disks at Requests for dumps.
Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=LSS/foundation-l-archives/2007_week_6/ja&oldid=19742113"