"All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

"All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

Ziko van Dijk
Hello,

Today I read on a WMDE driven website:

"»Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der das gesamte Wissen der
Menschheit jedem frei zugänglich ist. Das ist unser Ziel.«
Jimmy Wales"

(Imagine a world in which the entire knowledge of mankind is freely
accessible to everyone. That is our goal.)

I never read that in English. Jimmy Wales actually said: "... the sum
of all human knowledge".

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales

And I think that there is a huge difference between "the sum of
all..." and "all...". By the way, the traditional encyclopedias
described themselves by "the sum of all..."

But a number of Wikimedia national organizations seem to have
difficulties with Jimmy's phrase. They 'translate' it to "all..." I
did not succeed, for example, in explaining to my own national
organization why it is wrong what we have on our business cards.

Am I the only one seeing a problem here?

Kind regards
Ziko








--
Ziko van Dijk
The Netherlands
http://zikoblog.wordpress.com/

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

KIZU Naoko
I'm afraid it sounds a bit OT, but I'm serious, really.

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Today I read on a WMDE driven website:
>
> "»Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der das gesamte Wissen der
> Menschheit jedem frei zugänglich ist. Das ist unser Ziel.«
> Jimmy Wales"
>
> (Imagine a world in which the entire knowledge of mankind is freely
> accessible to everyone. That is our goal.)
>
> I never read that in English. Jimmy Wales actually said: "... the sum
> of all human knowledge".
>
> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales
>
> And I think that there is a huge difference between "the sum of
> all..." and "all...". By the way, the traditional encyclopedias
> described themselves by "the sum of all..."
>
> But a number of Wikimedia national organizations seem to have
> difficulties with Jimmy's phrase. They 'translate' it to "all..." I
> did not succeed, for example, in explaining to my own national
> organization why it is wrong what we have on our business cards.

Gibt uns hier Problem? Welche Art?

Fast zwanzig Jahren war es mir Raetzel, ob Verschendung gibt zwischen
"das gesammte Werk" (oder die gesaemmte Werken) und "die Sammelung
Werkes" und "die saemmtliches Werken". Keine Woerterbueche haben mich
geholfen. Auf Japanisch liegt hier nur ein Wort so dass wir es
benutzen, aber wenn Du so nett waere, bitte mal mir Erklaerungen,
koenntest Du wirklich floh machen.

MhG,


>
> Am I the only one seeing a problem here?
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Ziko van Dijk
> The Netherlands
> http://zikoblog.wordpress.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>



--
KIZU Naoko / 木津尚子
member of Wikimedians in Kansai  / 関西ウィキメディアユーザ会 http://kansai.wikimedia.jp

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

David Richfield
In reply to this post by Ziko van Dijk
> And I think that there is a huge difference between "the sum of
> all..." and "all...". By the way, the traditional encyclopedias
> described themselves by "the sum of all..."

Can you explain this perceived difference?  Is the whole more than the
sum of its parts, so that the German claim is too ambitious for you,
or is it less than the sum of its parts, making the German claim too
modest?

--
David Richfield
e^(πi)+1=0

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada
In reply to this post by Ziko van Dijk
I think that the phrase meaning refered to Wikipedia is "the sum of all
human knowledge which is notable and encyclopedic".

Not ALL, ALL, ALL human knowledge. MySpace discarded.

2011/9/16 Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>

> Hello,
>
> Today I read on a WMDE driven website:
>
> "»Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der das gesamte Wissen der
> Menschheit jedem frei zugänglich ist. Das ist unser Ziel.«
> Jimmy Wales"
>
> (Imagine a world in which the entire knowledge of mankind is freely
> accessible to everyone. That is our goal.)
>
> I never read that in English. Jimmy Wales actually said: "... the sum
> of all human knowledge".
>
> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales
>
> And I think that there is a huge difference between "the sum of
> all..." and "all...". By the way, the traditional encyclopedias
> described themselves by "the sum of all..."
>
> But a number of Wikimedia national organizations seem to have
> difficulties with Jimmy's phrase. They 'translate' it to "all..." I
> did not succeed, for example, in explaining to my own national
> organization why it is wrong what we have on our business cards.
>
> Am I the only one seeing a problem here?
>
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Ziko van Dijk
> The Netherlands
> http://zikoblog.wordpress.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

KIZU Naoko
Don't worry emijrp, I guess no German may hit your idea - MySpace
things may be unproblematic omitted in convention: For knowing mere
facts, they don't use this word - it's Kennen or Kenntnis. Not Wissen.

I'd like to add, while German is not my mother tongue, in the German
language "Wissen" is not totally equal to English "knowledge". In
German terminology this word has more systematic, scientific and
metaphysical nuances. Much nearer to science in English - in German
science is Wissenschaft, a derivation of "Wissen".

Wissen has been historically a very rigid notion in German so that
once it was argued soulless object (i.e. human) or a sum of certain
facts could be included into "Wissen". For another example, Hegel even
argued anatomy didn't worth to be called science (Wissenschaft) since
it was a mere sum of empirical fact in Vorrede of Phaenomenologie des
Geistes. MySpace things may be rejected by all German speakers with
their version, I expect.

On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 4:01 AM, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I think that the phrase meaning refered to Wikipedia is "the sum of all
> human knowledge which is notable and encyclopedic".
>
> Not ALL, ALL, ALL human knowledge. MySpace discarded.
>
> 2011/9/16 Ziko van Dijk <[hidden email]>
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Today I read on a WMDE driven website:
>>
>> "»Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der das gesamte Wissen der
>> Menschheit jedem frei zugänglich ist. Das ist unser Ziel.«
>> Jimmy Wales"
>>
>> (Imagine a world in which the entire knowledge of mankind is freely
>> accessible to everyone. That is our goal.)
>>
>> I never read that in English. Jimmy Wales actually said: "... the sum
>> of all human knowledge".
>>
>> http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Jimmy_Wales
>>
>> And I think that there is a huge difference between "the sum of
>> all..." and "all...". By the way, the traditional encyclopedias
>> described themselves by "the sum of all..."
>>
>> But a number of Wikimedia national organizations seem to have
>> difficulties with Jimmy's phrase. They 'translate' it to "all..." I
>> did not succeed, for example, in explaining to my own national
>> organization why it is wrong what we have on our business cards.
>>
>> Am I the only one seeing a problem here?
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Ziko
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ziko van Dijk
>> The Netherlands
>> http://zikoblog.wordpress.com/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>



--
KIZU Naoko / 木津尚子
member of Wikimedians in Kansai  / 関西ウィキメディアユーザ会 http://kansai.wikimedia.jp

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

Robert Rohde
In reply to this post by Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:01 PM, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I think that the phrase meaning refered to Wikipedia is "the sum of all
> human knowledge which is notable and encyclopedic".
>
> Not ALL, ALL, ALL human knowledge. MySpace discarded.

When you look back to when that quote was issued (at least 2004), I
think I tend to see it as broader and more aspirational.  Wikipedia
was already the biggest project, but we still imagined ourselves
making a statement with Wikinews and Wiktionary and everything else.
Back in the day, I can certainly imagine Wikimedia wanting to
encompass all forms of human knowledge, including projects going far
beyond the confines of what we now see as notable and encyclopedic.
We have retreated from that quite a lot.  Even within Wikipedia our
notions of what was acceptable and what was not were far more fluid.

The projects have accomplished an incredible amount, and we should all
be very proud and amazed at what we have done.  However, I do think we
have lost some of that early dream.  Back in the day, it was easy to
imagine that we would eventually encompass all human knowledge, and
now we tend to draw our goals more narrowly.  In part, I think our
perceptions of that famous quote have been evolving alongside our
perceptions of what Wikimedia and Wikipedia have become.

-Robert Rohde

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada
Hi;

Perhaps, you may want to help me compiling information about this topic and
improving the estimate.[1]

There is a false sensation about Wikipedia being almost complete. In the
other hand, projects like WikiSource are in their infance, for example,
Internet Archive hosts about 3 million public domain books,[2] how many of
them are available at WikiSource?

This project compile images for every square kilometre in Britain.[3] We can
use this idea for Commons, and take thousands of millions of photos of all
the world. : )

Regards,
emijrp

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Emijrp/All_human_knowledge
[2] http://www.archive.org/details/texts
[3] http://www.geograph.org.uk/

2011/9/16 Robert Rohde <[hidden email]>

> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:01 PM, emijrp <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I think that the phrase meaning refered to Wikipedia is "the sum of all
> > human knowledge which is notable and encyclopedic".
> >
> > Not ALL, ALL, ALL human knowledge. MySpace discarded.
>
> When you look back to when that quote was issued (at least 2004), I
> think I tend to see it as broader and more aspirational.  Wikipedia
> was already the biggest project, but we still imagined ourselves
> making a statement with Wikinews and Wiktionary and everything else.
> Back in the day, I can certainly imagine Wikimedia wanting to
> encompass all forms of human knowledge, including projects going far
> beyond the confines of what we now see as notable and encyclopedic.
> We have retreated from that quite a lot.  Even within Wikipedia our
> notions of what was acceptable and what was not were far more fluid.
>
> The projects have accomplished an incredible amount, and we should all
> be very proud and amazed at what we have done.  However, I do think we
> have lost some of that early dream.  Back in the day, it was easy to
> imagine that we would eventually encompass all human knowledge, and
> now we tend to draw our goals more narrowly.  In part, I think our
> perceptions of that famous quote have been evolving alongside our
> perceptions of what Wikimedia and Wikipedia have become.
>
> -Robert Rohde
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Robert Rohde
On 09/16/11 12:38 PM, Robert Rohde wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:01 PM, emijrp<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> I think that the phrase meaning refered to Wikipedia is "the sum of all
>> human knowledge which is notable and encyclopedic".
>>
>> Not ALL, ALL, ALL human knowledge. MySpace discarded.
> When you look back to when that quote was issued (at least 2004), I
> think I tend to see it as broader and more aspirational.  Wikipedia
> was already the biggest project, but we still imagined ourselves
> making a statement with Wikinews and Wiktionary and everything else.
> Back in the day, I can certainly imagine Wikimedia wanting to
> encompass all forms of human knowledge, including projects going far
> beyond the confines of what we now see as notable and encyclopedic.
> We have retreated from that quite a lot.  Even within Wikipedia our
> notions of what was acceptable and what was not were far more fluid.
>
> The projects have accomplished an incredible amount, and we should all
> be very proud and amazed at what we have done.  However, I do think we
> have lost some of that early dream.  Back in the day, it was easy to
> imagine that we would eventually encompass all human knowledge, and
> now we tend to draw our goals more narrowly.  In part, I think our
> perceptions of that famous quote have been evolving alongside our
> perceptions of what Wikimedia and Wikipedia have become.
>

Strictly speaking, "the sum of" is a redundancy, but its English
idiomatic use tends to emphasize comprehensiveness. For those of us who
saw the dream earlier on being "notable and encyclopedic" was never part
of the dream, and still isn't. A literal interpretation of "the sum of
all human knowledge" is still impossible; it's simply too big and
constantly growing. It still warns us to avoid restrictive
preconceptions about what is notable and encyclopedic.

Ray

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: "All human knowledge", by Jimmy Wales (?)

Thomas Morton
On 17 Sep 2011, at 09:41, Ray Saintonge <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 09/16/11 12:38 PM, Robert Rohde wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 12:01 PM, emijrp<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>>> I think that the phrase meaning refered to Wikipedia is "the sum of all
>>> human knowledge which is notable and encyclopedic".
>>>
>>> Not ALL, ALL, ALL human knowledge. MySpace discarded.
>> When you look back to when that quote was issued (at least 2004), I
>> think I tend to see it as broader and more aspirational.  Wikipedia
>> was already the biggest project, but we still imagined ourselves
>> making a statement with Wikinews and Wiktionary and everything else.
>> Back in the day, I can certainly imagine Wikimedia wanting to
>> encompass all forms of human knowledge, including projects going far
>> beyond the confines of what we now see as notable and encyclopedic.
>> We have retreated from that quite a lot.  Even within Wikipedia our
>> notions of what was acceptable and what was not were far more fluid.
>>
>> The projects have accomplished an incredible amount, and we should all
>> be very proud and amazed at what we have done.  However, I do think we
>> have lost some of that early dream.  Back in the day, it was easy to
>> imagine that we would eventually encompass all human knowledge, and
>> now we tend to draw our goals more narrowly.  In part, I think our
>> perceptions of that famous quote have been evolving alongside our
>> perceptions of what Wikimedia and Wikipedia have become.
>>
>
> Strictly speaking, "the sum of" is a redundancy, but its English
> idiomatic use tends to emphasize comprehensiveness. For those of us who
> saw the dream earlier on being "notable and encyclopedic" was never part
> of the dream, and still isn't. A literal interpretation of "the sum of
> all human knowledge" is still impossible; it's simply too big and
> constantly growing. It still warns us to avoid restrictive
> preconceptions about what is notable and encyclopedic.
>
> Ray


"sum" is a representation of the total value of a sequence.

Similarly the sum of all knowledge is the representation of our
sequence of knowledge.

So we take a large body of disorganised information and collate it
into something of greater value.

Statements like that are not so much about size or scope; but about value.

Tom

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