Jump to content

User talk:Jimbo Wales

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Citizensmith (talk | contribs) at 22:37, 8 July 2010 (→‎Real names now legally required, what will WMF do). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Fix bunching

Template:Fix bunching

(Manual archive list)

Template:Fix bunching

Wikimania

Jimbo is currently http://twitter.com/jimmy wales at the party in Poland that is Wikimania - Off2riorob (talk) Off2riorob (talk) 08:37, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Policy discussions

Extended policy discussions should not be hosted here, please continue the discussion regarding the child protection policy at the policy talkpage here Wikipedia talk:Child protection, thanks. Off2riorob (talk) 18:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A thought about moving admin recall forward

Granted that our problem is getting more new admins and not getting rid of old ones, it has been suggested that if there was a recall process, it would be easier to pass initial RfA, and therefore we could get more people to stand.

Thus: Wikipedia talk:Administrators open to recall/Alternative process#Admin recall -- moving the process along politically Herostratus (talk) 03:20, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Real names now legally required, what will WMF do

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/biz/2008/10/123_32121.html

Looks like the Korean wiki now requires real names by law in Korea. Will the WMF comply? Truth And Relative Dissention In Space (talk) 14:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I very much hope not. Shame to Korea. --Cyclopiatalk 14:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It seems unlikely that it would apply to us.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 14:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WMF is a US-based organization, that's the answer.-AM (talk) 14:58, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That article is unclear about whether it is intended to apply to foreign sites as well. If it is, then South Korea has a choice: exempt Wikipedia from it or block Wikipedia within South Korea. I doubt they'll consider the latter to be worth it, but it's their choice (and, of course, many South Koreans would bypass the block in the same way people resident in other countries have bypassed similar blocks). --Tango (talk) 19:15, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article suggests that no law is even passed yet, its just "planned". Even if it passes, what it will say is unclear, whether it will intend to apply to WMF is unclear, and whether it can apply to WMF is highly doubtful.--Milowent (talk) 19:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It can apply in as much as the Korean authorities can block access to WMF sites if the WMF doesn't comply. There is no doubt regarding whether Korea can force the WMF to comply: it can't. --Tango (talk) 20:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That article is from 2008 I notice Citizensmith (talk) 22:37, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]