Re: [Foundation-l] Movement roles letter, Feb 2012
Why would both Associations and Affiliates both need to use Wikimedia marks ? Does OpenStreetMap need it if it gets some grants from the WMF ? I hope that these models won't be used to softly downgrade (or threaten to downgrade) chapters that would be said not having their bylaws and mission aligned with Wikimedia's. Le 13/02/2012 08:09, Ting Chen a écrit : The Board approves the following letter to be sent to the community: The organizational structure of the Wikimedia movement is growing rapidly: since 2010, the number of chapters has grown by 50%, and the size of the Foundation has doubled. Over the past 18 months, the movement roles group has worked to clarify the roles and responsibilities of different groups working within our international movement, and the Board thanks those who have participated in this process. We want to make it easier for a wider variety of groups to be recognized as part of the movement. Below are draft resolutions to recognize new models of affiliation, based on input received to date. They are posted on Meta for feedback, to encourage discussion and improvement. We encourage everyone to participate on the talk pages between now and 10 March. We aim to finalize, approve, and publish the resolutions by 28 March. Thanks, Ting. Posted on Meta at: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_roles/affiliations == Expansion of movement affiliation models == In acknowledgement of the diversity of groups contributing to our movement, the Board recognizes an expanded framework for affiliation of Wikimedia groups furthering our movement: *: '''Chapters''': legal entities with bylaws and mission aligned with Wikimedia's, focused on supporting related work within a geography. Chapters must reach agreement with the Foundation for use of the Wikimedia trademarks for their work, publicity, and fundraising; and would be allowed to use a name clearly linking them to Wikimedia. *: '''Partner Organizations''': legal entities with bylaws and mission aligned with Wikimedia's, focused on a cultural, linguistic, or other topic; not be exclusive to any geography. Partner organizations must reach agreement with the Foundation for use of the Wikimedia trademarks for their work, publicity, and fundraising; and would be allowed to use a name clearly linking them to Wikimedia. *: '''Associations''': open-membership groups with an established contact person and stated purpose, which need basic use of the Wikimedia trademarks for promotion and organization of projects and events. A new association can be formed by listing its information in a public place, and confirming their contact information. An association contact can sign an optional agreement to use Wikimedia marks in a limited way in the scope of their work. Small projects can be supported through individual reimbursement. *: '''Affiliates''': like-minded organizations that actively support the movement's work. They are listed publicly and granted limited use of the marks on websites and posters indicating their support of and collaboration with Wikimedia. == Recognizing new affiliation models == In connection with its decision to expand the framework of affiliated groups, the Board expands the mandate of the Chapters Committee to include all affiliations, and asks it to update its scope and rules of procedure to cover: * recognizing all group models * mentoring chapters and partner organiations * reviewing and summarizing the status of all groups The committee should also indicate what resources it will need to be effective, including staff support and resources from the Foundation. This proposed charter and plan should be shared with the Board by 15 June, for approval by its July 2012 meeting. ;References: * [[wmf:Audit charter]] * [[wmf:Resolution:Chapters committee/Scope]] * [[wmf:Resolution:Chapters committee/Rules of procedure]] -- Mathias Damour 49 rue Carnot 74000 Annecy 04 57 09 10 56 06 27 13 65 51 mathias.dam...@laposte.net ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Re: [Foundation-l] Waste of money, Wikipediacentrism. - Brazil
Le 25/01/2012 14:51, Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton a écrit : Dear all, Well as you know, Brazil is a priority, but when spending is a waste. We have a volunteer group that operates in Brazil since 2008 in direct contact with the problems of Brazil, know much about the free national culture, know a lot about education in the country, and their projects, they can tell the reasons why Brazil has poor performance on Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation conducted several interviews with the group, I was interviewed three times and had several conversations with several different employees. Also recently a person was hired to do a search on this, already operating in Brazil. And yesterday they announced the arrival of two more employees to ask only that, again. [1] They already have the answer to these interviews, what they are asking again? And what I find worse is the fact that there is a prohibitive message for explanation of other Wikimedia projects. As for the local group that Wikipedia is not central. And there will be an office of WMF, only to activities for Wikipedia. And many Brazilians criticize the model of the WMF, and that centralization in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is only the tenth seventh most visited site in the country. Need better, yes, but the problem is the community that is not healthy, and that the WMF does not interfere on that. So it's skating, and spending resources unnecessarily. Several staff members say the Wikipedia impact is larger than the other projects. Which has more impact for you? The Movement Wikimedia projects through education, created free educational resources available in Wikibooks, and classes on Wikiversity, this could change the lives of thousands of poor children or The Movement Wikimedia succeeded in creating an encyclopaedia in Portuguese high quality Unfortunately I live in a country that 38% of teens lives in extreme poverty [2], how they want to create a program just with universities, to share knowledge if people that never walk inside one university? Or not be able to read the contents of Wikipedia because they were not properly literate. I'm not talking to literate Brazilians, I'm talking to create free educational resources, and create classes, and encourage businesses and organizations to do that change, this is a collaborative work. With the money spent to keep three people six days in Brazil from the U.S.A., we could fund a fellow to start a social work with teachers to create this material.What is the interest of the WMF on this? Our priority is Wikipedia *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. * I'll keep imagining, and having to push myself very hard to see this world. That will never be reached by Wikipedia alone.Especially in Brazil. That's interesting. What kind of free educational resources would you like to be developed ? What about a Wikikids in portugese ? By the way, on that subject, I'd like to point out this discussion I had on simple.wikipedia about Wikikids/Vikidia : https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Simple_talk/Archive_96#WikiKids_-_Vikidia However, even if this project is doing well in two languages yet (wikikids.nl and fr.vikidia.org), I'm not sure it can be endorsed or just supported by the WMF ! -- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]] http://fr.vikidia.org/ 49 rue Carnot 74000 Annecy France 00 (33)4 57 09 10 56 00 (33)6 27 13 65 51 mathias.dam...@laposte.net ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
[Foundation-l] WikiKids - Vikidia: encyclopedia for children
say that the fact that this wiki is not so big and hasn't been created in other language may show that its aim would not be so clear, mobilizing and justifying. By the way, on Vikidia, we do hope to be usefull not only to children but to people of any age that would like a simple approach of a subject, or a shorter one than on Wikipedia. We beleive that if its content were not relevant to older people, it wouldn't be good either for children. Another thought, one may even link this projet with an article of the convention on the Rights of the Child http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_the_Rights_of_the_Child which is the following: Article 13 http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/crc.htm#art13 1. The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive *and impart* information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice. 2. The exercise of this right may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; or (b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. I'm afraid that the main objection may be the opinion I can read on the 2010 discussion on this list, which is to assume that anything that deals with children should be exclusively conducted by certified professionnals, and thus can not be an open collaboration project. Since I can't see any legal grounds to it (do you need a licence to write a book for children ?), I guess it has some sociological or cultural grounds... However, the point of this message is to address the I don't think it can work well objection, associated with issues such as vandalism, censorship, defining the appropriate content, children motivation and ability to edit articles... since it does work well at least in two language, where there is children, teenagers and adults working together to better the wiki. And thousands of readers every days. Previous discussions on this mailing list : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2005-January/015108.html January 2005 http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2007-May/thread.html#30511 May 2007 http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2010-June/thread.html#59456 June 2010 On the wikis : http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikikids http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jimbo_Wales/Archive_86#New_Wikipedia_for_Kids October 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_79#WikiKids_-_Vikidia:_encyclopedia_for_children October 2011 http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Wikipedia_exclusively_for_Kids http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Wiki_for_kids http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Wikipedia_Junior http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28proposals%29/Archive_30#Wikipediakids and July 2010 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28policy%29/Archive_78#NOTCENSORED_and_content_control http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28proposals%29/Archive_78#Summary_Pages_NOT_Childrens.27_Pages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_%28proposals%29/Persistent_proposals#Abbreviated_Wikipedia_or_Childrens.27_Wikipedia Greetings, -- Mathias Damour [[User:Astirmays]] 49 rue Carnot 74000 Annecy France 00 (33)4 57 09 10 56 00 (33)6 27 13 65 51 mathias.dam...@laposte.net ___ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
