DOCSLIB.ORG

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Bwilkins/Questions

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Bwilkins/Questions Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Ca... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee... Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Candidates/Bwilkins/Questions From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia < Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013 | Candidates | Bwilkins Wikidata item not found. Candidates are advised to answer each of these questions completely but concisely. Candidates may refuse to answer any questions that they do not wish to, with the understanding, however, that not answering a question may be perceived negatively by the community. Note that disclosure of your account history, pursuant to the ArbCom selection and appointment policy, must be made in your opening statement, and is not an optional question. Contents 1 General questions 2 Individual questions 2.1 Question from Mark Arsten 2.2 Questions by Sven Manguard 2.3 Questions from Rschen7754 2.4 Questions from Collect 2.5 Questions by Gerda Arendt 2.6 Questions by NuclearWarfare 2.7 Question from Tryptofish 2.8 Question from SirFozzie 2.9 Question from Sceptre 2.10 Question from Piotrus 2.11 Question from User:MONGO 2.12 Question from User:Bielle 2.13 Question from User:Worm That Turned 2.14 Question from User:Leaky caldron 2.15 Questions from User:Thewolfchild 1 General questions 1. What skills and experience, both on Wikipedia and off, will you bring to the Arbitration Committee if elected? Contrary to popular belief on-Wiki, I'm one of the most amiable people you would ever meet in person. In real-life, I'm known to have a very sensitive BS-meter, and have formally and successfully arbitrated/mediated many disputes in-person because of that. 1 of 17 11/24/13, 11:35 PM Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Ca... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee... Even leaders who serve others from their knees have to call "BS" sometimes. Yes, I'm passionate. Yes, I have a fairly firm belief in how others should be treated, and on how processes should be followed. Those are assets, not detriments. 2. What experience have you had with the Wikipedia dispute resolution processes, both formal and informal? Please discuss any arbitration cases, mediations, or other dispute-resolution forums in which you have participated. There are two on-wiki situations where I felt the specific situation had degraded enough -but yet there was enough goodwill- to try and mediate directly with the other party. One was WikiGreekBasketball, who had lost the faith the community as a whole, and another is more recent with an editor who simply wanted to add their own definition to policies, and then accuse dozens of people of breaking their version. In real life, I have extensive mediation experience - tribal elders, military representatives, civilians, it runs the gamut. However, there's a big difference to "pointy end of a weapon" mediation compared to Wikipedia... I think I prefer our model! 3. Every case is evaluated on its own merits ... but as a general matter, do you think you would you side more often with those who support harsher sanctions (bans, topic-bans, desysoppings, etc.) against users who have misbehaved, or would you tend to be on the more lenient side? What factors might generally influence your votes on sanctions? There are too many variables to generalize, however, I have a longstanding philosophy that has been published on my userpage since forever, and I always evaluate everything by it: Everyone has something to add to Wikipedia, only some people just don't know it yet. I also firmly believe that any sanctions must be appropriate in terms of severity, length, and measurability. I typically go by "what is the simplest, shortest sanction that can be applied right now to stop AND help to amend the behaviour that is currently damaging the project in some manner". So, this typically means first "offenses" are likely more lenient, but recidivism rapidly leads to harsher 4. Please disclose any conflicting interests, on or off Wikipedia, that might affect your work as an arbitrator (such as by leading you to recuse in a given type of case). I have none that I am aware of 5. Arbitrators are elected for two-year terms. Are there any circumstances you anticipate might prevent you from serving for the full two years? I cannot foresee any reason why I could not serve 2 years 6. Identify a recent case or situation that you believe the ArbCom handled well, and one you believe it did not handle well. For the latter, explain what you might have done differently. 2 of 17 11/24/13, 11:35 PM Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Ca... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee... 7. The ArbCom has accepted far fewer requests for arbitration (case requests) recently than it did in earlier years. Is this a good or bad trend? What criteria would you use in deciding whether to accept a case? It's a good trend if and only if there are other areas that have the mandate, power and resources to deal with the specific case. As such, there are two key criteria that come to mind immediately: 1) the effect on a significant population of the project by not acting immediately, and 2) the "court of last resort" concept 8. What changes, if any, would you support in ArbCom's procedures? How would you try to bring them about? Being an Arb won't give me or anyone a stronger voice in the community - and I really hope nobody believes that to be the case - in the end, we're all editors and members at an equal level, but some people have a couple of extra tools, or have to make a couple of extra wide-reaching decisions - no biggie. As such, my suggestions (such as methods of resolving issues at "lower" levels) are just suggestions. For example, individual admins can review most unblocks...the next level is WP:BASC...the final level is ArbCom as a whole - an example of how most things should work (the only difference I see is that ArbCom should only be involved in those if certain conditions are met/have not been met). I have dozens of times recommended "Admin Review Boards" as regular reviews of all admins, which would (hopefully) reduce the numerous admin abuse complaints to ArbCom, AND make for better/more consistent admins on the whole. However, these are the suggestions of an editor with equal voice to everyone else 9. What changes, if any, would you support in ArbCom's overall role within the project? Are responsibilities properly divided today among the ArbCom, the community, and the WMF office? Does the project need to establish other governance committees or mechanisms in addition to ArbCom? Following my idea that ArbCom should function more like the Supreme Court of Canada as last court of appeal, and test-case hearing, there most certainly should be "lower bodies" that handle many of the "typical" cases that arise at ArbCom (and more likely than not get rejected). There needs to be a step between RFC/U (voluntary) and ArbCom that is formalized, and with appropriate teeth and expertise. ArbCom is intended to represent the community as it sits now - and it's more like a "jury of your peers", but it has more and more complaints that it has "lost touch" with that community. 10. It is often stated that "the Arbitration Committee does not create policy, and does not decide content disputes." Has this been true in practice? Should it be true? Are there exceptions? 3 of 17 11/24/13, 11:35 PM Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2013/Ca... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee... It may not create policy or settle content, but it sets jurisprudence ... and in cases that have gone through every possible avenue of redress, setting jurisprudence is often just what we need 11. What role, if any, should ArbCom play in implementing or enforcing the biographies of living persons policy? BLP is implemented. As such, as ArbCom are aligned with the community, there's little additional role in implementing it. Between the BLPN, ANI, DRN and RFC/U, the community should be able to properly enforce the BLP policy as well. ArbCom members at that point are merely members of the community. However, severe cases of recidivism would need to be dealt with via ArbCom (based on our current structure), as well as the occasional use of Oversight 12. Sitting arbitrators are generally granted automatic access to the checkuser and oversight userrights on request during their terms. If elected, will you request these permissions? How will you use them? Arbs are usually granted these user-rights for use in the fulfillment of their duties: for example, gathering evidence using checkuser or viewing previously-oversighted material as part of a case. They are not specifically granted those permissions to perform day-to-day checkuser and oversight functions. However, oversight exists for what I would consider to be the emergency suppression of information beyond even RevDel. There is often a need to suppress an edit outside the view of even admins on an emergency basis. Now, I'm intentionally taking a circular route to answer the question on purpose: I did have a respected fellow-editor suggest that I apply for CU/OS rights this year. By applying for those, it would grant more "permanent" use, and that access would intentionally be in order to perform the full range of functions. I believe that it would be wise and prudent to do so in order to make full use in all situations, but would ensure to annotate in any logs whether I had used the tool in the process of Arb functions or as part of CU/OS functions 13.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Decentralization in Wikipedia Governance
    Decentralization in Wikipedia Governance Andrea Forte1, Vanessa Larco2 and Amy Bruckman1 1GVU Center, College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology {aforte, asb}@cc.gatech.edu 2Microsoft [email protected] This is a preprint version of the journal article: Forte, Andrea, Vanessa Larco and Amy Bruckman. (2009) Decentralization in Wikipedia Governance. Journal of Management Information Systems. 26(1) pp 49-72. Publisher: M.E. Sharp www.mesharpe.com/journals.asp Abstract How does “self-governance” happen in Wikipedia? Through in-depth interviews with twenty individuals who have held a variety of responsibilities in the English-language Wikipedia, we obtained rich descriptions of how various forces produce and regulate social structures on the site. Our analysis describes Wikipedia as an organization with highly refined policies, norms, and a technological architecture that supports organizational ideals of consensus building and discussion. We describe how governance on the site is becoming increasingly decentralized as the community grows and how this is predicted by theories of commons-based governance developed in offline contexts. We also briefly examine local governance structures called WikiProjects through the example of WikiProject Military History, one of the oldest and most prolific projects on the site. 1. The Mechanisms of Self-Organization Should a picture of a big, hairy tarantula appear in an encyclopedia article about arachnophobia? Does it illustrate the point, or just frighten potential readers? Reasonable people might disagree on this question. In a freely editable site like Wikipedia, anyone can add the photo, and someone else can remove it. And someone can add it back, and the process continues.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Point of View: a Wikipedia Reader
    w ikipedia pedai p edia p Wiki CRITICAL POINT OF VIEW A Wikipedia Reader 2 CRITICAL POINT OF VIEW A Wikipedia Reader CRITICAL POINT OF VIEW 3 Critical Point of View: A Wikipedia Reader Editors: Geert Lovink and Nathaniel Tkacz Editorial Assistance: Ivy Roberts, Morgan Currie Copy-Editing: Cielo Lutino CRITICAL Design: Katja van Stiphout Cover Image: Ayumi Higuchi POINT OF VIEW Printer: Ten Klei Groep, Amsterdam Publisher: Institute of Network Cultures, Amsterdam 2011 A Wikipedia ISBN: 978-90-78146-13-1 Reader EDITED BY Contact GEERT LOVINK AND Institute of Network Cultures NATHANIEL TKACZ phone: +3120 5951866 INC READER #7 fax: +3120 5951840 email: [email protected] web: http://www.networkcultures.org Order a copy of this book by sending an email to: [email protected] A pdf of this publication can be downloaded freely at: http://www.networkcultures.org/publications Join the Critical Point of View mailing list at: http://www.listcultures.org Supported by: The School for Communication and Design at the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (Hogeschool van Amsterdam DMCI), the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) in Bangalore and the Kusuma Trust. Thanks to Johanna Niesyto (University of Siegen), Nishant Shah and Sunil Abraham (CIS Bangalore) Sabine Niederer and Margreet Riphagen (INC Amsterdam) for their valuable input and editorial support. Thanks to Foundation Democracy and Media, Mondriaan Foundation and the Public Library Amsterdam (Openbare Bibliotheek Amsterdam) for supporting the CPOV events in Bangalore, Amsterdam and Leipzig. (http://networkcultures.org/wpmu/cpov/) Special thanks to all the authors for their contributions and to Cielo Lutino, Morgan Currie and Ivy Roberts for their careful copy-editing.
    [Show full text]
  • Wikimania 2006 2006 the 2Nd International Wikimedia Foundation Conference
    WikimaniaWikimania 2006 2006 The 2nd International Wikimedia Foundation Conference Cambridge, Massachussetts, USA August 4-6, 2006 http://wikimania2006.wikimedia.org/ To our Sponsors: Thank you! Patrons: Benefactors: Friends: TM Supporters: | 2 | Wikimania ‘06 Welcome Conference Welcome Welcome to the second an- lawyers, technologists), and we nual international Wikimedia hope that this diversity will help conference! The Wikimedia each of you to consider free Foundation is excited to host knowledge, open information, the conference -- and proud and collaborative peer produc- that it is now officially an annual tion in all of their forms. event! The past year has been One thing worth emphasiz- an exciting one for the Founda- ing: this conference is not for tion, filled with challenges and spectators. Participate actively record growth across the proj- in discussions you go to; ask ects. Questions raised by these questions; leave comments on challenges and changes will be the conference wiki; give an well debated, and in some cases improptu lightning presenta- answered, during the conference. tion; share crazy ideas with your On behalf of the many fellow conferees. And have fun! people who have made Wikima- Whether it’s competing in the nia 2006 a reality, we are pleased world Calvinball championship to welcome Wikimaniacs to or debating whether consensus Cambridge, Massachusetts, and really scales, we want you to to Harvard University. We hope have a good time. Please talk to you enjoy your stay here. We a volunteer or information desk would like to extend a special staffer if you have questions or welcome to our international need help during the conference.
    [Show full text]
  • A Wikipedia Reader
    UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Critical point of view: a Wikipedia reader Lovink, G.; Tkacz, N. Publication date 2011 Document Version Final published version Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Lovink, G., & Tkacz, N. (2011). Critical point of view: a Wikipedia reader. (INC reader; No. 7). Institute of Network Cultures. http://www.networkcultures.org/_uploads/%237reader_Wikipedia.pdf General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:05 Oct 2021 w ikipedia pedai p edia p Wiki CRITICAL POINT OF VIEW A Wikipedia Reader 2 CRITICAL POINT OF VIEW A Wikipedia Reader CRITICAL POINT OF VIEW 3 Critical Point of View: A Wikipedia Reader Editors: Geert Lovink
    [Show full text]
  • Do As I Do: Authorial Leadership in Wikipedia
    Do As I Do: Authorial Leadership in Wikipedia Joseph M. Reagle Jr. Department of Culture and Communication New York University 239 Greene Street, 7th Floor New York, NY 10003 (212) 998-5191 [email protected] Abstract In this paper I consider how notions of leadership oper- In seemingly egalitarian collaborative on-line communities, ate in collaborative on-line cultures. In particular, I consider like Wikipedia, there is often a paradoxical, or perhaps the seemingly paradoxical, or perhaps merely playful, juxta- merely playful, use of the title “Benevolent Dictator” for position of informal tyrant-like titles (i.e., “Benevolent Dic- leaders. I explore discourse around the use of this title so as tator”) in otherwise seemingly egalitarian voluntary content to address how leadership works in open content commu- production communities such as Wikipedia. To accomplish nities. I first review existing literature on “emergent lead- this, I first review existing literature on the role of leadership ership” and then relate excerpts from community discourse in such communities. I then relate excerpts from community on how leadership is understood, performed, and discussed discourse (i.e., email and wiki) on how leadership is under- by Wikipedians. I conclude by integrating concepts from stood, performed, and discussed in the Wikipedia commu- existing literature and my own findings into a theory of “au- nity. I conclude by integrating concepts from existing litera- thorial” leadership. ture and my own findings into a theory of “authorial” leader- ship: leaders must parlay merit resulting from “doing good” Categories and Subject Descriptors H[5]: 3 into a form of authority that can also be used in an auto- cratic fashion, though with a soft touch and humor, when— General Terms Human Factors, Management and only when—necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Wikipedia and Cyberculture ___/ a Platform for the Social Consensus, Or a Platform for Social Folly?
    \___ Wikipedia and Cyberculture ___/ A platform for the social consensus, or a platform for social folly? December 2007 Jamie Radul (BA General Program 1st Year) In the nineteen-thirties H.G.Wells wrote a book of essays called “World Brain,” where he called for an educational knowledge network in the form of a “Permanent World Encyclopedia," whereby "any student, in any part of the world, will be able to sit with his projector in his own study at his or her convenience to examine any book, any document, in an exact replica.” The essay "The Brain Organization of the Modern World" lays out Wells' vision for "a sort of mental clearing house for the mind, a depot where knowledge and ideas are received, sorted, summarized, digested, clarified and compared."1 Today these words seem like premonitions to our digital era, and had H.G.Wells lived to see the age of the internet, he might have been the man to begin the mass collaborative project towards his 'world en-cyclopedia'. But by the time the internet came around full swing, H.G. Wells was dead. And Jimmy Wales, internet 'web portal' pornographer / founder of free online encyclopedia, Nupedia2, was very much alive! Yes he was, and in 2001 he launched a second, free online encyclopedia that was different from Nupedia in that it was to build its articles through the consensus of a very open- ended, almost anarchistic, mass collaboration. Wikipedia was from its inception an encyclopedia that 'anyone can edit', and one of its first policies was to 'ignore all the rules'.
    [Show full text]
  • About Wikipedia (English)
    Wikipedia:About 1 Wikipedia:About Wikipedia (pronounced /ˌwɪkɨˈpiːdi.ə/ WIK-i-PEE-dee-ə) is a multilingual, web-based, free-content encyclopedia project based on an openly editable model. The name "Wikipedia" is a portmanteau of the words wiki (a technology for creating collaborative websites, from the Hawaiian word wiki, meaning "quick") and encyclopedia. Wikipedia's articles provide links to guide the user to related pages with additional information. Wikipedia is written collaboratively by largely anonymous Internet volunteers who write without pay. Anyone with Internet access can write and make changes to Wikipedia articles (except in certain cases where editing is restricted to prevent disruption or vandalism). Users can contribute anonymously, under a pseudonym, or with their real identity, if they choose. The fundamental principles by which Wikipedia operates are the Five pillars. The Wikipedia community has developed many policies and guidelines to improve the encyclopedia; however, it is not a formal requirement to be familiar with them before contributing. Since its creation in 2001, Wikipedia has grown rapidly into one of the largest reference websites, attracting nearly 78 million visitors [1] monthly as of January 2010. There are more than 91,000 active contributors [2] working on more than 17,000,000 articles in more than 270 languages. As of today, there are 0 articles in English. Every day, hundreds of thousands of visitors from around the world collectively make tens of thousands of edits and create thousands of new articles to augment the knowledge held by the Wikipedia encyclopedia. (See also: Wikipedia:Statistics.) People of all ages, cultures and backgrounds can add or edit article prose, references, images and other media here.
    [Show full text]
  • How English Wikipedia Moderates Harmful Speech
    Content and Conduct: How English Wikipedia Moderates Harmful Speech The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Clark, Justin, Robert Faris, Urs Gasser, Adam Holland, Hilary Ross, and Casey Tilton. Content and Conduct: How English Wikipedia Moderates Harmful Speech. Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, Harvard University, 2019. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:41872342 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA CONTENT AND CONDUCT: HOW ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA MODERATES HARMFUL SPEECH NOV 2019 JUSTIN CLARK ROBERT FARIS URS GASSER ADAM HOLLAND HILARY ROSS CASEY TILTON Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the following people for their critical contributions and support: The 16 interview participants for volunteering their time and knowledge about Wikipedia content moderation; Isaac Johnson, Jonathan Morgan, and Leila Zia for their guidance with the quantitative research methodology; Patrick Earley for his guidance and assistance with recruiting volunteer Wikipedians to be interviewed; Amar Ashar, Chinmayi Arun, and SJ Klein for their input and feedback throughout the study; Jan Gerlach and other members of the Legal and Research teams at the Wikimedia Foundation for their guidance in scoping the study and for providing feedback on drafts of the report; and the Wikimedia Foundation for its financial support. Executive Summary In this study, we aim to assess the degree to which English-language Wikipedia is successful in addressing harmful speech with a particular focus on the removal of deleterious content.
    [Show full text]
  • Criticism of Wikipedia from Wikipidia.Pdf
    Criticism of Wikipedia from Wikipidia For a list of criticisms of Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Criticisms. See also Wikipedia:Replies to common objections. Two radically different versions of a Wikipedia biography, presented to the public within days of each other: Wikipedia's susceptibility to edit wars and bias is one of the issues raised by Wikipedia critics http://medicalexposedownloads.com/PDF/Criticism%20of%20Wikipedia%20from%20Wikipidia.pdf http://medicalexposedownloads.com/PDF/Examples%20of%20Bias%20in%20Wikipedia.pdf http://medicalexposedownloads.com/PDF/Wikipedia%20is%20Run%20by%20Latent%20Homosexual%20Homophob ics.pdf http://medicalexposedownloads.com/PDF/Bigotry%20and%20Bias%20in%20Wikipedia.pdf http://medicalexposedownloads.com/PDF/Dear%20Wikipedia%20on%20Libelous%20lies%20against%20Desire%20 Dubounet.pdf http://medicalexposedownloads.com/PDF/Desir%c3%a9%20Dubounet%20Wikipidia%20text.pdf Criticism of Wikipedia—of the content, procedures, and operations, and of the Wikipedia community—covers many subjects, topics, and themes about the nature of Wikipedia as an open source encyclopedia of subject entries that almost anyone can edit. Wikipedia has been criticized for the uneven handling, acceptance, and retention of articles about controversial subjects. The principal concerns of the critics are the factual reliability of the content; the readability of the prose; and a clear article layout; the existence of systemic bias; of gender bias; and of racial bias among the editorial community that is Wikipedia. Further concerns are that the organization allows the participation of anonymous editors (leading to editorial vandalism); the existence of social stratification (allowing cliques); and over-complicated rules (allowing editorial quarrels), which conditions permit the misuse of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is described as unreliable at times.
    [Show full text]
  • Wikipedia: a Republic of Science Democratized
    CHEN_ART_FINAL.DOCX 5/18/2010 1:29 PM WIKIPEDIA: A REPUBLIC OF SCIENCE DEMOCRATIZED * Shun-Ling Chen TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 249 II. WHAT IS WIKIPEDIA AND HOW DOES IT WORK? ...................... 252 III. THE COMMONS-COLLABORATIVE MODEL AND ITS ORIGIN..... 255 IV. THE COMMONS-COLLABORATIVE MODEL IN WIKIPEDIA AND ITS NEW REPUBLIC ...................................................... 262 A. Anyone Can Edit ............................................................ 266 B. Anonymity and User Privacy ........................................ 269 C. Copyright, Collaboration and a Free Encyclopedia ...... 270 D. Community Self-Governance and Meritocracy ............ 271 E. Content Policy and Quality Control .............................. 273 V. WIKIPEDIA AND ITS BOUNDARY-WORK..................................... 279 A. Defense Against External Pressure .............................. 282 1. Criticism: Wikipedia is Vulnerable to Vandalism .. 282 2. Criticism: Wikipedia Is Untrustworthy For Academic Citation ................................................... 284 3. Criticism: Wikipedia is Prone to be Abused For Tolerating Anonymity ............................................. 285 4. Criticism: Wikipedia Disrespects Expertise ........... 288 * S.J.D candidate at Harvard Law School; LL.M.. 2005, Harvard Law School. She thanks editors of the Albany Law Journal of Science & Technology for their meticulous work, and thanks T.B., Gabriella Coleman, William W. Fisher,
    [Show full text]
  • Wikipedia Und Geschichtswissenschaft
    Thomas Wozniak, Jürgen Nemitz und Uwe Rohwedder (Hrsg.) Wikipedia und Geschichtswissenschaft Wikipedia und Geschichts- wissenschaft Herausgegeben von Thomas Wozniak, Jürgen Nemitz und Uwe Rohwedder ISBN 978-3-11-037634-0 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-037635-7 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-039871-7 Dieses Werk ist lizenziert unter der Creative-Commons-Attribution-ShareAlike-3.0-Lizenz. Weitere Informationen finden Sie unter http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.dnb.de abrufbar. © 2015 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Dieses Buch ist als Open-Access-Publikation verfügbar unter www.degruyter.com. Einbandabbildung: By © Ralf Roletschek – Fahrradtechnik und Fotografie (Own work) [FAL, GFDL] Druck und Bindung: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Gedruckt auf säurefreiem Papier Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com In memoriam Peter Haber 1964–2013 Vorwort Als vom23. bis 26.September 2014 in Göttingen der 50.Historikertag stattfand,war dort auch erstmalseine Sektion vertreten, die sich ausschließlich aufdas Thema „Wikipedia und Geschichtswissenschaft – eine Zwischenbilanz“ konzentriert hatte. Die Sektion warlangevorher geplant und beantragt worden, aber im Frühjahr 2014 hatte die breit geführte Debatte um das Seeschlachtenbuch des C.H.Beck-Verlages die Notwendigkeit einer Auseinandersetzungmit der Thematik deutlich gezeigt. Damals fanden sich wörtliche, aber nicht gekennzeichnete, Passagen ausder Wikipedia im 2013 erschienenen Werk „Große Seeschlachten: Wendepunkte der Weltgeschichte vonSalamis bis Skagerrak“ des VerlagesC.H.
    [Show full text]
  • Plaintiff's Exhibit 6
    Case 1:15-cv-00662-TSE Document 168-10 Filed 12/18/18 Page 1 of 10 Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA No. 15-cv-0062-TSE (D. Md.) Plaintiff’s Exhibit 6 Case 1:15-cv-00662-TSE Document 168-10 Filed 12/18/18 Page 2 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION, Plaintiff, v. No. 1:15-cv-00662-TSE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY / CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE, et al., Defendants. DECLARATION OF EMILY TEMPLE-WOOD I, Emily Temple-Wood, declare: 1. I am a resident of Downers Grove, Illinois, over the age of eighteen. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated in this declaration, and, if called to testify, I could and would testify competently thereto. I am providing this declaration in my capacity as a Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. (“Wikimedia”) community member. I am not an employee or contractor of Wikimedia. 2. I completed a Bachelor of Science degree from Loyola University Chicago, and I am currently a third-year medical student at Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine at Midwestern University. I. Background 3. Wikimedia is a nonprofit charitable organization based in San Francisco, California, dedicated to encouraging the growth, development, and distribution of multilingual educational content, and to providing the full content of “wiki”-based projects to the public free of charge. 1 Case 1:15-cv-00662-TSE Document 168-10 Filed 12/18/18 Page 3 of 10 Wikimedia operates twelve free-knowledge projects (“Projects”) on the Internet, including Wikipedia, the world’s largest and most popular encyclopedia.
    [Show full text]