A proposal of partnership between Wikimedia Foundation and Internet Archive

[Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada]

Hi all;

I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead or
offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for the
facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve their
database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when needed.

I think that this can be a cool partnership.

Regards,
emijrp
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[David Gerard-2]

On 24 August 2010 14:57, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead or
> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for the
> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve their
> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when needed.
> I think that this can be a cool partnership.


+1


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Nikola Smolenski-2]

On 08/24/2010 03:57 PM, emijrp wrote:
> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead or
> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for the
> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve their
> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when needed.

I wanted to suggest this for a long time. I see two more reasons for this:

- We are often copying free images or text from various sites (for
example flickr but other ones too). It happens that these sites go
offline or change their licenses later. Having such an archive, archived
by an independent organization, would be indisputable proof of copyright
status.

- Wikipedia often writes articles about current events, and these link
to various news organizations as sources. It happens sometimes that
these sources stealthily change their content for various reasons. Such
an archive, if it would be able to quickly follow Wikipedia's new links,
would be a strong deterrent against this Orwellian trend.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Martin Pascal-2]

Dear all,

The french ( since two years ) and hungarian wikipedia are using our
archive, and it will be implemented in other french project.

You could see them on all the french article :
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maupassant#Notes_et_r.C3.A9f.C3.A9rences

just click on archive.

When a link is making we storage the content in real time after the link is
making.

If you need more information you could contact us on freenode on the chanel
: #linterweb.

Sincerely
Pascal

----- Original Message -----
From: "David Gerard" <[hidden email]>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 4:08 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] A proposal of partnership between Wikimedia
Foundation and Internet Archive

> On 24 August 2010 14:57, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
>> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead
>> or
>> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for
>> the
>> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
>> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
>> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve
>> their
>> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when
>> needed.
>> I think that this can be a cool partnership.
>
>
> +1
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l 

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Teun Spaans]

This looks like a solid organization. Solid in the sense that it wont
go suddenly offline.

Such links may be valuable for:
- article references to sources, in case the source goes offline
- article references to sources, in case thesource changes its content
- media copies when the source changes or removes a license

I took a look at the example in the french wiki, and didnt spot a date
in the archive reference. If the source changes its content, this may
pose a problem.

kind regards,
teun

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:57 PM, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all;
>
> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead or
> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for the
> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve their
> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when needed.
>
> I think that this can be a cool partnership.
>
> Regards,
> emijrp
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Martin Pascal-2]

Dear teun,

Linterweb is working around the wikipedia before 2007 :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia
So i am sure we will be online in the futur :)

Looks like:
http://wikiwix.com
http://okawix.com

Not a problem, if the source changes there is no change in our cache, it is
what want the french community.

Now we are working in feature , to add a parameter in the link wich needs
frequently update.

Sincerely
Pascal

----- Original Message -----
From: "teun spaans" <[hidden email]>
To: "Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 4:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Foundation-l] A proposal of partnership between Wikimedia
Foundation and Internet Archive

> This looks like a solid organization. Solid in the sense that it wont
> go suddenly offline.
>
> Such links may be valuable for:
> - article references to sources, in case the source goes offline
> - article references to sources, in case thesource changes its content
> - media copies when the source changes or removes a license
>
> I took a look at the example in the french wiki, and didnt spot a date
> in the archive reference. If the source changes its content, this may
> pose a problem.
>
> kind regards,
> teun
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:57 PM, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi all;
>>
>> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
>> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead
>> or
>> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for
>> the
>> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
>> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
>> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve
>> their
>> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when
>> needed.
>>
>> I think that this can be a cool partnership.
>>
>> Regards,
>> emijrp
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l 

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Bence Damokos]

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 4:47 PM, teun spaans <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I took a look at the example in the french wiki, and didnt spot a date
> in the archive reference. If the source changes its content, this may
> pose a problem.
>
> If you click on an archive link the top frame will display the exact date
of the archiving -   I think the reason it is not displayed by default on
the French Wikipedia is because the archive links are generated by
JavaScript on the fly. (At least that was the case the last time I looked at
the French Wikipedia.)

Having the ability to store multiple copies of the same webpage (for
different dates) was one of the first feature requests we had at the
Hungarian Wikipedia and it seems they are working on it. Still, Wikiwix's
service is very convenient and hassle free for all the static websites or
references.


Webcitation.org also has a service for on-demand archiving and they do store
multiple versions of the same page. Unfortunately their service is often
intermittent and their website tends to go dark, but otherwise it is a
convenient service for manual archiving. (I had a bot once that sent each
link through its service on the Hungarian Wikipedia, and for a time the
English Wikipedia had a similar bot.

Best regards,
Bence
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada]

We need a trusted and reliable archiving project (and perhaps mirrors).
Webcite or Wikiwix can be great projects, but, how long will they be in the
web? Until 2012? 2015? 2020?

The average life of a website is 77 days[1], and we see dead links
everywhere in Wikipedia articles. This is a big problem, and not only for
Wikipedia, Internet builds and destroyes information too fast.

Internet Archive is a nonprofit foundation, and it is running since 1996, so
I think that it is a stable project and they are going to create mirrors in
more countries (now there is a mirror in Alexandria). But, of course,
Webcite or Wikiwix can help storing web copies (3 different archiving
projects are better than only 1).

Regards,
emijrp

[1] http://www.archive.org/about/faqs.php

2010/8/24 Bence Damokos <[hidden email]>

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 4:47 PM, teun spaans <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > I took a look at the example in the french wiki, and didnt spot a date
> > in the archive reference. If the source changes its content, this may
> > pose a problem.
> >
> > If you click on an archive link the top frame will display the exact date
> of the archiving -   I think the reason it is not displayed by default on
> the French Wikipedia is because the archive links are generated by
> JavaScript on the fly. (At least that was the case the last time I looked
> at
> the French Wikipedia.)
>
> Having the ability to store multiple copies of the same webpage (for
> different dates) was one of the first feature requests we had at the
> Hungarian Wikipedia and it seems they are working on it. Still, Wikiwix's
> service is very convenient and hassle free for all the static websites or
> references.
>
>
> Webcitation.org also has a service for on-demand archiving and they do
> store
> multiple versions of the same page. Unfortunately their service is often
> intermittent and their website tends to go dark, but otherwise it is a
> convenient service for manual archiving. (I had a bot once that sent each
> link through its service on the Hungarian Wikipedia, and for a time the
> English Wikipedia had a similar bot.
>
> Best regards,
> Bence
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[David Gerard-2]

On 24 August 2010 17:32, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Internet Archive is a nonprofit foundation, and it is running since 1996, so
> I think that it is a stable project and they are going to create mirrors in
> more countries (now there is a mirror in Alexandria). But, of course,
> Webcite or Wikiwix can help storing web copies (3 different archiving
> projects are better than only 1).


That's a key point: have multiple archives easily supported.
(Hopefully not as complicated as what happens when you click on an
ISBN.)


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[theo10011]

Its a great idea, using the wayback machine to ward of link rot. I support
it but doesn't Google cache offer a similar service. there is also
deadURL.com which uses Google Cache, the Internet Archive, and user
submissions for gathering dead links.

I would guess that Google Cache would have the highest and the longest
reliability, at least as long as Google exists, its their business.

Regards

Theo

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 10:07 PM, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 24 August 2010 17:32, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > Internet Archive is a nonprofit foundation, and it is running since 1996,
> so
> > I think that it is a stable project and they are going to create mirrors
> in
> > more countries (now there is a mirror in Alexandria). But, of course,
> > Webcite or Wikiwix can help storing web copies (3 different archiving
> > projects are better than only 1).
>
>
> That's a key point: have multiple archives easily supported.
> (Hopefully not as complicated as what happens when you click on an
> ISBN.)
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Rodan Bury]

Google's cache only last a handful of days. It's very useful if the Website
is down temporarily (for maintenance or overload for example) but totally
useless otherwise.

Kind Regards, Dodoïste

2010/8/24 theo10011 <[hidden email]>

> Its a great idea, using the wayback machine to ward of link rot. I support
> it but doesn't Google cache offer a similar service. there is also
> deadURL.com which uses Google Cache, the Internet Archive, and user
> submissions for gathering dead links.
>
> I would guess that Google Cache would have the highest and the longest
> reliability, at least as long as Google exists, its their business.
>
> Regards
>
> Theo

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[???]

Nikola Smolenski wrote:
>
> I wanted to suggest this for a long time. I see two more reasons for this:
>
> - We are often copying free images or text from various sites (for
> example flickr but other ones too). It happens that these sites go
> offline or change their licenses later. Having such an archive, archived
> by an independent organization, would be indisputable proof of copyright
> status.

Personally I wouldn't rely on a flickr CC license as being in any way
reliable.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Flickr_washing

I've seen too many AP photographs cropped to remove the AP attribute and
uploaded to flickr as CC-BY to accept a flickr CC license at face value.
In most cases the person doing so is probably taking stuff already
cropped, and probably believes that if it is on the internet its public
domain.

No university, publisher, or newspaper has used my CC licensed images
either commercially or non-commercially without checking with me first
that the work is actually CC licensed. They have always carried out some
form of due diligence to ascertain that the image is either licensed
properly, and that they get a specific license to reuse. IOW they obtain
a 'paper trail' of permission.


> - Wikipedia often writes articles about current events, and these link
> to various news organizations as sources. It happens sometimes that
> these sources stealthily change their content for various reasons. Such
> an archive, if it would be able to quickly follow Wikipedia's new links,
> would be a strong deterrent against this Orwellian trend.
>

If someone is making copies of web pages that is a copyright violation.
Unless they have, in the US, specific exemption from the US Copyright
Office, that can lead to some heavy legal issues. The internet archive
happens to have limited permissions on obsolete games and software, but
otherwise it respects copyright and robots.txt and applies the
directives retroactively.

http://www.archive.org/about/terms.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Archive#Healthcare_Advocates.2C_Inc.
http://web.archive.org/web/20020923133856rn_1/www.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/22/nyregion/22LOUI.html


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Rodan Bury]

2010/8/24 <[hidden email]>

> Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> >
> > I wanted to suggest this for a long time. I see two more reasons for
> this:
> >
> > - We are often copying free images or text from various sites (for
> > example flickr but other ones too). It happens that these sites go
> > offline or change their licenses later. Having such an archive, archived
> > by an independent organization, would be indisputable proof of copyright
> > status.

> The internet archive [...] respects copyright and robots.txt and applies
> the
> directives retroactively.
>

And so does Wikiwix. Wikiwix do respect robots.txt. Linterweb's advocate
certified there is no legal issue with Wikiwix.

Regards, Dodoïste
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Robert Rohde]

Does anyone know what the status of the Internet Archive is with
respect to being a practical ongoing concern?

In the last couple years IA has added relatively little web-based content.

For example, their Wayback Machine currently offers:

www.nytimes.com: 11 pages since 2006
en.wikipedia.org: 5 pages since 2008
www.nasa.gov: 12 pages since 2008
scienceblogs.com: 0 pages since 2008

It gives the impression that they are so ineffective at archiving
recent content as to be effectively irrelevant.  They do have a
warning that it can take 6 or more months for newly accessed content
to be incorporated into their database, but at this point the delay
has been significantly more than that.  Even at their peak they rarely
archived more than a few hundred pages per major domain per year,
which still amounts to a tiny fraction of the internet.

The idea of seeking collaborations with people that archive web
content is a good one, but I don't know that IA is really in a
position to be all that useful.

-Robert Rohde

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:57 AM, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all;
>
> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead or
> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for the
> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve their
> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when needed.
>
> I think that this can be a cool partnership.
>
> Regards,
> emijrp
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Excirial]

* It gives the impression that they are so ineffective at archiving recent
content as to be effectively irrelevant.*

Your not the only person asking that question, have a look at this FAQ
entry<http://www.archive.org/about/faqs.php#103>and This
forum post<http://www.archive.org/post/320741/large-site-with-no-entries-at-all-for-2008-2009-2010>.
To specifically quote the FAQ:
**

* It generally takes 6 months or more (up to 24 months) for pages to appear
in the Wayback Machine after they are collected, because of delays in
transferring material to long-term storage and indexing, or the requirements
of our collection partners. *

*In some cases, crawled content from certain projects can appear in a much
shorter timeframe — as little as a few weeks from when it was crawled. Older
material for the same pages and sites may still appear separately, months
later. *

*There is no access to files before they appear in the Wayback Machine.
*

* Even at their peak they rarely archived more than a few hundred pages per
major domain per year, which still amounts to a tiny fraction of the
internet*
Keep in mind that sub-pages are indexed separately. For example the
Administrators
noticeboard
<http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard>and
blocking policy<http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy>are
indexed at least several times a year. Equally keep in mind that the
reliable sources we use rarely change content on a later date. A news
article published in a news paper is static, and most news article's posted
are equally static (With one or two updates before being moved from the main
page). As of such we don't need a high interval for updates - a single back
link is often more then sufficient for referencing purposes, since we aren't
keeping a revision history for sources.

~Excirial




On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Robert Rohde <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Does anyone know what the status of the Internet Archive is with
> respect to being a practical ongoing concern?
>
> In the last couple years IA has added relatively little web-based content.
>
> For example, their Wayback Machine currently offers:
>
> www.nytimes.com: 11 pages since 2006
> en.wikipedia.org: 5 pages since 2008
> www.nasa.gov: 12 pages since 2008
> scienceblogs.com: 0 pages since 2008
>
> It gives the impression that they are so ineffective at archiving
> recent content as to be effectively irrelevant.  They do have a
> warning that it can take 6 or more months for newly accessed content
> to be incorporated into their database, but at this point the delay
> has been significantly more than that.  Even at their peak they rarely
> archived more than a few hundred pages per major domain per year,
> which still amounts to a tiny fraction of the internet.
>
> The idea of seeking collaborations with people that archive web
> content is a good one, but I don't know that IA is really in a
> position to be all that useful.
>
> -Robert Rohde
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 6:57 AM, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > Hi all;
> >
> > I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
> > when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead
> or
> > offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for
> the
> > facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
> > websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
> > links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve
> their
> > database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when
> needed.
> >
> > I think that this can be a cool partnership.
> >
> > Regards,
> > emijrp
> > _______________________________________________
> > foundation-l mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Nikola Smolenski-2]

Дана Tuesday 24 August 2010 21:05:05 [hidden email] написа:

> Nikola Smolenski wrote:
> > I wanted to suggest this for a long time. I see two more reasons for
> > this:
> >
> > - We are often copying free images or text from various sites (for
> > example flickr but other ones too). It happens that these sites go
> > offline or change their licenses later. Having such an archive, archived
> > by an independent organization, would be indisputable proof of copyright
> > status.
>
> Personally I wouldn't rely on a flickr CC license as being in any way
> reliable.
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Flickr_washing
>
> I've seen too many AP photographs cropped to remove the AP attribute and
> uploaded to flickr as CC-BY to accept a flickr CC license at face value.
> In most cases the person doing so is probably taking stuff already
> cropped, and probably believes that if it is on the internet its public
> domain.

That is another issue entirely. And in order to determine if an image has been
washed in such a way and who did it you have to know its origin.

> No university, publisher, or newspaper has used my CC licensed images
> either commercially or non-commercially without checking with me first
> that the work is actually CC licensed. They have always carried out some

If the original website is gone, they can't even call to check.

> > - Wikipedia often writes articles about current events, and these link
> > to various news organizations as sources. It happens sometimes that
> > these sources stealthily change their content for various reasons. Such
> > an archive, if it would be able to quickly follow Wikipedia's new links,
> > would be a strong deterrent against this Orwellian trend.
>
> If someone is making copies of web pages that is a copyright violation.
> Unless they have, in the US, specific exemption from the US Copyright
> Office, that can lead to some heavy legal issues. The internet archive

It appears that so far this has not been a problem in practice, and anyway if
they are willing to take the risk, who are we to stop them?

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Robert Rohde]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 12:05 PM,  <[hidden email]> wrote:
<snip>
> No university, publisher, or newspaper has used my CC licensed images
> either commercially or non-commercially without checking with me first
> that the work is actually CC licensed. They have always carried out some
> form of due diligence to ascertain that the image is either licensed
> properly, and that they get a specific license to reuse. IOW they obtain
> a 'paper trail' of permission.

Good for you.  Most professional publishers do make every effort to
carry out due diligence.  However, I have had a several cases where
well known newspapers and magazines appropriated my images without
attempting to contact me (and in some cases even without providing any
attribution).  It does leave me to wonder how many other times my
images might have been used professionally and/or improperly and I
just don't know about it.

-Robert Rohde

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[Ray Saintonge]

David Gerard wrote:

> On 24 August 2010 14:57, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
>> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead or
>> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for the
>> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
>> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
>> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve their
>> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when needed.
>> I think that this can be a cool partnership.
>>    
> +1
>
>  

Are people who clean up dead links taking the time to check Internet
Archive to se if the page in question is there?


Ec

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[metasj]

Here's the Archive's on-demand service:

http://archive-it.org

That would be the most reliable way to set up the partnership emijrp
proposes.  And it's certainly a good idea.  Figuring out how to make
it work for almost all editors and make it spam-proof may be
interesting.

SJ



On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> David Gerard wrote:
>> On 24 August 2010 14:57, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
>>> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead or
>>> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for the
>>> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
>>> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
>>> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve their
>>> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when needed.
>>> I think that this can be a cool partnership.
>>>
>> +1
>>
>>
> Are people who clean up dead links taking the time to check Internet
> Archive to se if the page in question is there?
>
>
> Ec
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>

--
Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

[George William Herbert]

On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Samuel Klein <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Here's the Archive's on-demand service:
>
> http://archive-it.org
>
> That would be the most reliable way to set up the partnership emijrp
> proposes.  And it's certainly a good idea.  Figuring out how to make
> it work for almost all editors and make it spam-proof may be
> interesting.
>
> SJ
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> David Gerard wrote:
>>> On 24 August 2010 14:57, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I want to make a proposal about external links preservation. Many times,
>>>> when you check an external link or a link reference, the website is dead or
>>>> offline. This websites are important, because they are the sources for the
>>>> facts showed in the articles. Internet Archive searches for interesting
>>>> websites to save in their hard disks, so, we can send them our external
>>>> links sql tables (all projects and languages of course). They improve their
>>>> database and we always have a copy of the sources text to check when needed.
>>>> I think that this can be a cool partnership.
>>>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>>
>> Are people who clean up dead links taking the time to check Internet
>> Archive to se if the page in question is there?
>>
>>
>> Ec
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> foundation-l mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Samuel Klein          identi.ca:sj           w:user:sj
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l

I actually proposed some form of Wikimedia / IArchive link
collaboration some years ago to a friend who worked there at the time;
however, they left shortly afterwards.

I like SJ's particular idea.  Who has current contacts with Brewster
Kahle or someone else over there?


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l