Talk:Freedom of Panorama in Europe in 2015/Learn more/ES
No parece serio señalar que una ley es mala (o no) en función de las implicaciones que pueda tener (o no) en Wikimedia.
- See NoW for more on this. Thierry Caro (talk) 16:53, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, if people want to ignore how Wikipedia gets damaged, they must have a look there.
- What happens if a vandal vandalises a page on Wikipedia? You take action or you create awareness so it gets fixed. If a government has the intention to vandalise (like censorship, or other things that directly hurt the mission of Wikipedia), there are no admin buttons to be used. Then the only thing that is possible is creating awareness. And that is the only thing that should be done: providing knowledge. Providing knowledge in the form of articles, but also providing knowledge how Wikipedia works and how quality is secured/arranged.
- If Wikipedia gets damaged by a certain law, Wikipedia is no longer neutral, but becomes biased. Then Wikipedia lost.
- And by the way, "Please think twice.'" is not enough. Matters like this needs to be thought through much more times.
- If we ridiculing a serious treat, then Wikipedia loses. If we do not provide knowledge, Wikipedia gets sacrificed, and its neutrality gets sacrificed. Our only job is to provide knowledge, that is what this project should do as well only. Romaine (talk) 18:52, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Not actual map
Crimea appears as part of Ukraine instead of Russia
No he enviado ninguna petición, aunque lo he intentado, porque es complicado dirigir un correo electrónico a los eurodiputados con los vínculos dados, pues redirigen a microsoft y pide datos personales. ¿por qué no lo hacen sencillo dando directamente los correos electrónicos??
los esfuerzos no fueron en balde, parece serː Derechos de autor: el PE pide impulsar diversidad cultural y hacerla accesible. Saludos --Yeza (talk) 16:45, 9 July 2015 (UTC)