Benutzer Diskussion:CorporateM

aus Wikipedia, der freien Enzyklopädie
Dies ist die aktuelle Version dieser Seite, zuletzt bearbeitet am 21. Dezember 2016 um 23:59 Uhr durch imported>Xqbot(627628) (Bot: Neue Nachricht von der DÜP).
(Unterschied) ← Nächstältere Version | Aktuelle Version (Unterschied) | Nächstjüngere Version → (Unterschied)

Willkommen / Welcome

Apparently you don’t understand German, or understand it only at a basic level. This is a welcome message to introduce you to the German Wikipedia, with the most important places and departments you may want to consult.

  • The embassy is perhaps the first place to go. There you can ask questions and get in touch with people who can translate your requests.
  • The German equivalent of the “village pump” is Questions about Wikipedia which can be used to ask questions and discuss matters of all kinds about Wikipedia. Feel free to ask questions in your preferred language, but questions in English will probably get the quickest responses as opposed to those asked in less common languages.
  • Common requests: Request to usurp existing user accounts • Request a Bot flag.
  • You are also welcome to participate in the multilingual Adopt-a-user program.
  • For your user page: You might want to create your user page and put some babel boxes on it, so everyone knows what languages you speak. For example: “{{Babel|en|de-0}}” if you are a native English speaker, but speak no German at all.

How to help? One thing you could do is to improve this template (translate, fix errors, etc.), to help more contributors who do not speak German.

Once again, welcome! -- Túrelio (Diskussion) 20:48, 31. Jan. 2013 (CET)

JMP (Software)

I fixed a few typos, the article should be O.K. now. --Reinhard Kraasch (Diskussion) 22:18, 11. Jun. 2013 (CEST)

Poll on COi editing

Hi David, just to keep you informed: we are preparing a poll about COI editing on the German Wikipedia. Right now it asks if there should be any rule changes at all, and then asks for specifics. The proposals are somewhere between "edit nowhere at all" and "be transparent." Right now we are in preparation, so that at the end we'll have a poll that everybody can agree to vote in: Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Verschärfung der Regeln zum Interessenkonflikt. best -- Dirk Franke (Diskussion) 18:44, 29. Jul. 2013 (CEST)

Hi David, read your nice post about PR professionals and trust. Congratulations. Although sometimes it seems you are quite lonely on your endeavour :-) so the poll will probably start next week, and this is my final go-around for people to voice ideas or objectons before it starts. It will start soon. best. -- Dirk Franke (Diskussion) 18:15, 23. Sep. 2013 (CEST)
Most of my colleagues don't "get it" and Wikipedia is counter to the decades of established precedence in how public relations works and what our role is in business and society. I have talked to some folks in Germany and the UK that run ethical operations, though I suspect we may all have different versions of what ethics means on Wikipedia. I have started getting more involved in the Word of Mouth Marketing Association, which it turns out some of my clients are a member of. They are big on the Federal Trade Commission's disclosure laws and I think is the right place for me to find like-minded professionals.
Anyways, what post about trust? And where is this final go-around? Did you want me to comment? CorporateM (Diskussion) 18:33, 23. Sep. 2013 (CEST)
Hi Corporate. Sorry. Somehow I missed you answering. No, you don't need to comment on the final go-around - but if you want to it's on the discussion page of the poll. The "trust post" is that one. But right now I want something different? Do you mind if I translate your Q&A post from the signpost into German and post it in my blog (of course with CC-whatever and all that stuff). -- Dirk Franke (Diskussion) 16:47, 1. Okt. 2013 (CEST)
Not at all. I like to think it was a nice boring post - just the way we like things around here. I just pinged someone from the WMF legal team RE david's comments, but I suspect it is outside their scope. Since the German Wikipedia has a habit of setting precedence for English, I have a vested interest in the discussion. I think it's similar to how the government would want to get input from the industry they are proposing regulations for, which is needed, but then the public will naturally have some concerns over whether the commercial sector has too much influence, which is also sometimes the case. CorporateM (Diskussion) 17:21, 1. Okt. 2013 (CEST)
Yeah, I think the post was very Wikipedia-like and it has a lot of points quite concentrated. If I would be the Foundation I'd say, it's not our responsibility. When the community really wants it, it would be able to block such people/get their IP adresses, and if not, there's no clear consensus. The point with injunctions: I'm really thinking about it - for the really annoying people nobody wants, hitting them in real life seems to be the way promising the most success. -- Dirk Franke (Diskussion) 18:04, 1. Okt. 2013 (CEST)
Blocks are the harshest sanctions we have available on Wikipedia and in most cases they are just throwaway accounts. I think the burden of creating real legal repercussions rests with the FTC and other bodies like it. Or rather, it rests with the community and ethical professionals to persuade them to make an example out of someone. It is not fair that ethical firms must compete against astroturfing operations that can get more "favorable" content outcomes, faster and with fewer resources. Ethical operations should therefor band together to help regulate the industry. We want the market to flourish for legitimate, honest work, but we won't be able to do that at-scale until we're able to clear some of the black-hat and educate the market on what black-hat is. CorporateM (Diskussion) 18:21, 1. Okt. 2013 (CEST)

It's online. -- Dirk Franke (Diskussion) 19:28, 1. Okt. 2013 (CEST)

Cool. I linked to your German translation here and posted an extensive comment on the poll. I think there is a conflict between the fact that we need a simple, universal rule, such as the Bright Line, but in practice there is a lot of nuance and things that depend on the circumstances. Yet, we don't want to communicate that nuance, because PR reps will have poor judgement when it comes to following it. CorporateM (Diskussion) 19:52, 1. Okt. 2013 (CEST)

Problem mit Deiner Datei (22.12.2016)

Hallo CorporateM,

bei der folgenden von dir hochgeladenen Datei gibt es noch ein Problem:

  1. Datei:Fortinet Logo.gif - Problem: Lizenz
  • Lizenz: Eine Lizenz ist die Erlaubnis, eine Datei unter bestimmten Bedingungen zu nutzen. In der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia werden nur solche Dateien akzeptiert, die unter einer freien Lizenz stehen, die hier gelistet sind. Unser Online-Assistent unter https://wmts.dabpunkt.eu/freigabe3/ hilft Dir, eine passende Lizenz auszuwählen und den Text für Dich anzupassen. Wenn du der Urheber der Datei oder der Inhaber der Nutzungsrechte bist, kannst Du ihn benutzen, um den Text anschließend in die Dateibeschreibungsseite einzufügen.

Durch Klicken auf „Bearbeiten“ oben auf der Dateibeschreibungsseite kannst du die fehlenden Angaben nachtragen. Wenn das Problem nicht innerhalb von 14 Tagen behoben wird, muss die Datei leider gelöscht werden.

Fragen beantwortet dir möglicherweise die Bilder-FAQ. Du kannst aber auch gern hier in diesem Abschnitt antworten, damit dir individuell geholfen wird.

Vielen Dank für deine Unterstützung, Xqbot (Diskussion) 00:59, 22. Dez. 2016 (CET)

Abgerufen von „https://de.wikiup.org/index.php?title=Benutzer_Diskussion:CorporateM&oldid=160884211“