I don't really mind WMF working with closed-access publishers, if that works. What I think is that we don't put the same effort indoing something with the openaccess world: all the initiatives I know are volunteer-based. Two pop up in my mind: the Signalling Open Access project, aimed to put an icon aside every reference in Wikipedia, to signal if the article is OA or closed. Ask Daniel Mietchen for updates. The other one is the possibility of uploading thousands of articles in wikisource, directly in HTML. Remember, we have Wikipedia Zero: putting stuff onWikisource means having a free digital library to everyone. In the recent Wikisource conference in Vienna we talked about that too, and rhere is an ongoing discussion in the English Wikisource. Both these two projects could have a huge impact on open access and in general for our mission, but they rely on the good will and free time of few individuals, and have done for years now. Aubrey Il 01/dic/2015 03:54 "John Mark Vandenberg" <jayvdb(a)gmail.com> ha scritto:

According to https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Zero_Template_Agreement and https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:WikiProject_Open_Access/Programma…, the answer appears to be yes that Wikipedia Zero now includes Wikisource. (It would be good to get clarification on whether all the services described on Foundation wiki are automatically included in Wikipedia Zero, included on a per-carrier basis, or some other scheme.) Pine On Dec 1, 2015 12:29 AM, "John Mark Vandenberg" <jayvdb(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Wikimedia is in the position to work with many institutions not committed to open access, free software etc. That's not the problem. The position of Wikimedia movement is in such position that it's not just about free knowledge, but about common good of the whole humanity. And (the most of) legitimate representatives of humanity are outside open access, free content etc. I've followed the issue of linguists vs. Elsevier. Although I don't know the whole background, I could say that that particular confrontation is not something we should react differently than giving more prominence to open access journals. However, this issue is a game changer. Elsevier attacks a member of our own wider movement. And we are the only entity inside of that wider movement capable to make a proper response. Which means that we have to do that, as our responsibility in particular is related to our wider movement. If we send clear message, anyone willing to make that kind of pressure to any entity inside of our wider movement would have to have in mind that we will respond, as well. If we fail to send such messages in the situation like this one, we gamble with being perceived as weak. As per John, it's not about removing references, as we are doing our job and closed-source journals are one of the valid sources of information. However, it is about formal relations between Wikimedia Foundation, other Wikimedia organizations and Elsevier. On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 9:13 AM, Andrea Zanni <zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Hello, I felt strongly enough about Wikipedia's relationship with open access content that I wrote about the issue. < http://bluerasberry.com/2015/10/wikipedia-open-access-and-the-wikipedia-lib… yours, On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 4:07 AM, Pete Forsyth &lt;peteforsyth(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > For what it's worth, we had a panel discussion at WMF about this, with Open > Access advocates and staff from WMF. Freely licensed video of the session > is available on YouTube. See here for video links: > http://wikistrategies.net/oa-Wikipedia-panel/ > One of our panelists, John Dove, wrote a follow-up blog post; others are in > the works. > Pete > [[User: Peteforsyth]] > https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/11/12/open-access-in-closed-access-world/ > On Nov 30, 2015 6:33 PM, "Milos Rancic" &lt;millosh(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > May we actually stop having anything with these pest? > > > http://custodians.online/ > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Lane Rasberry user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia 206.801.0814 lane(a)bluerasberry.com