Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results
Thank you, chapters and thorgs! I take your decision as a vote of confidence that encourages me to work harder and better. Congratulations, Frieda! I'm really happy to share with you this responsability and I'm looking forward to work with you in the Board. I also need to thank Alice for her work and commitment. I have the privilege to be her friend and I've learnt a lot from her in these two years. I will miss you in the Board. Last, but not least, thanks to Anders for having the courage to nominate himself and bringing his views and his opinion to this process. Patricio PS: Thanks to Chris, Lorenzo and James for your work in the selection process. 2014-06-03 4:50 GMT-03:00 Jon Davies jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk: Yes well done, and thanks to all who stood making this a really difficult choice for us all! On 3 June 2014 08:42, Santi Navarro santiagonava...@wikimedia.org.es wrote: Felicidades Patricio / Auguri Frieda -- Santiago Navarro Sanz Wikimedia España http://www.wikimedia.org.es/ ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- *Jon Davies - Chief Executive Wikimedia UK*. Mobile (0044) 7803 505 169 tweet @jonatreesdavies Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). Telephone (0044) 207 065 0990. Visit http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and @wikimediauk ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- Patricio Lorente Blog: http://www.patriciolorente.com.ar Identi.ca // Twitter: @patriciolorente ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On 6/2/14, 10:55 PM, ??? wrote: There is no public interest in how many time celeb X got a detention at school for not doing their homework at junior high. Isn't that the kind of information you would in fact expect to find in a biography of any kind of public figure? If I were reading a biography of Winston Churchill or Louis Armstrong or Neil Armstrong or anyone else prominent enough to have a book-length biography written about them, I would typically expect it to include a chapter about their childhood, and that would normally include some details of how they did at school, if such details are known. That's precisely the kind of information that biographers search for when putting together a comprehensive biography. -Mark ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something that is improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their knowledge, I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on English Wikipedia. I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set up a framework which the community can use to decide which of several paths we would like to take. This is not my personal RfC, I just happen to think that with recent discussions trending positively about VE's improvement over the past several months and with the comments in this list about its possible value to acquiring new editors, I'm willing to put in some time to draft a framework for a discussion on-wiki. I am providing this note to let the community know that someone (me) is drafting a framework for on-wiki discussion. If someone else wants to start an RfC before I get around to starting one, that's completely ok. Cheers, Pine Without denigrating your considerable contributions to the project, Pine, I'd suggest that anyone setting up an RFC on this issue should have more recent experience with the product than you have, and I'd also suggest that an RFC is premature until there is an indication from the WMF that *they* feel the product might be ready for broader access. I don't think that a fair discussion can be had when it is happening without, for example, a clear understanding of what issues existed before and whether or not they have been resolved. I hope you will reconsider - or perhaps actually test the product for a couple of weeks before proceeding, so that the RFC can be based on factual information rather than well, some people think it should be enabled. There have always been some people who thought it should be enabled. There have always been some people who think it is a waste of engineering time and energy. But factual information about the current status of the tool, complete with intelligent assessment of its features, is what is really needed for the community to make a considered decision. Risker/Anne ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: Would WMF, being in the US, need to worry about this to any greater degree than it worries about, say, Chinese publishing restrictions, or UK superinjunctions? First, WMF operates globally, and while I took pains as general counsel, just as the WMF legal team does now, to limit exposure around the world, it is a mistake to suppose that jurisdictional protections are invariably impenetrable. See my discussion here on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqQOvxyj66w . Second, the ECJ decision can be used to go after editors individually, or organized WMF-affiliated groups. --Mike ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Chris Keating chriskeatingw...@gmail.com wrote: I don't believe Wikipedia could be a data controller as it has no legal personality, and legal personality is quite difficult to acquire when you set out to avoid acquiring it. On this point I must disagree. WMF is a legal entity. The editors are legal entities. The affiliated groups are legal entities. And there is nothing in the EU directive that requires what you are calling a legal personality. I think also though that if editors are potentially liable, then so are legal persons that engage in similar activity. Say for instance a European Wikimedia chapter engaged with a national archive to update Wikidata with a few million records, including some on living people. Arguably both of them could be acting as data controllers on those records for the rest of the duration of Wikidata. Hm. Now you are beginning to glimpse the scope of the ECJ opinion. Google has a clear purpose too, and it was no defense. Plus, there is a public-interest argument in favor of eschewing the erasure of true, accurate public data that happens to be old. This is all the case, but the decision makes it clear that this is a question in striking a balance between the interests of the data subject (the right to be forgotten, i.e. the ability to enjoy a private life), and the interests of others. This derives from Article 7(f) of the original directive. Not exactly. The case makes it clear that it is *asserting* that it is striking a balance, but when you read the specific language as a lawyer, it's clear that, regardless of what the ECJ says, there is no limiting principle regarding the scope of application. It also makes it clear that this balance may be struck in different places in different situations; for instance at Paragraph 81, talking about the balance of public interest in people who have taken a role in public life[1] who are arguably the sort we cover in our articles. There's that makes it clear language again. Do you really suppose Wikipedia information about individuals is limited to those who have (presumably voluntarily) taken a role in public life? When did this person -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dannielynn_Birkhead_paternity_case -- volunteer to take a role in public life? I'd agree that there is no clarity about what would happen if someone pursued this course of action with Wikipedia, but there are many differences between our case and Google's... Not really, if you read the precise language of the decision. Certainly, every other lawyer I've asked about this agrees with me that Wikipedia fits the definition of controller under the directive and the ECJ decision. --Mike ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Mike Godwin mnemo...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: Would WMF, being in the US, need to worry about this to any greater degree than it worries about, say, Chinese publishing restrictions, or UK superinjunctions? First, WMF operates globally, and while I took pains as general counsel, just as the WMF legal team does now, to limit exposure around the world, it is a mistake to suppose that jurisdictional protections are invariably impenetrable. See my discussion here on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqQOvxyj66w . Second, the ECJ decision can be used to go after editors individually, or organized WMF-affiliated groups. Does the ECJ need to establish jurisdiction over Wikimedia or specific users (presumably only those users directly involved in creating or curating the content in dispute)? We've seen in some situations in the past (e.g. with the DCRI and frwp) where governments have targeted users within their jurisdiction to demand information or actions. Could that happen here? Should the WMF choose to refuse to implement the directive, could the ECJ pursue penalties against the income stream of donations, or grant funding disbursed to WMF-related entities in the EU? Could the WMF seek exemptions under Article 9, or would we run into jurisdictional risks by doing that? In Article 23, it reads The controller may be exempted from this liability, in whole or in part, if he proves that he is not responsible for the event giving rise to the damage. Does this, perhaps in conjunction with the Section 230 status of the WMF, provide some cover? CC'd to the advocacy advisory list. ~Nathan ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: Does the ECJ need to establish jurisdiction over Wikimedia or specific users (presumably only those users directly involved in creating or curating the content in dispute)? We've seen in some situations in the past (e.g. with the DCRI and frwp) where governments have targeted users within their jurisdiction to demand information or actions. Could that happen here? Clearly, the EU doesn't need to establish jurisdiction over EU citizens who happen to be Wikimedians, since it already has it. The same is true with regard to affiliated organizations in the EU. Plus, and this is something that bears repeating, there is no particular reason to think that the EU might not claim it has jurisdiction over Wikimedia Foundation, even if it might have a hard time imposing it. Even claims of jurisdiction without merit can be problematic, as I explain here; http://youtu.be/wqQOvxyj66w. Should the WMF choose to refuse to implement the directive, could the ECJ pursue penalties against the income stream of donations, or grant funding disbursed to WMF-related entities in the EU? Could the WMF seek exemptions under Article 9, or would we run into jurisdictional risks by doing that? I wouldn't think any funds given to, or disbursed from, WMF in the EU would be immune. In Article 23, it reads The controller may be exempted from this liability, in whole or in part, if he proves that he is not responsible for the event giving rise to the damage. Does this, perhaps in conjunction with the Section 230 status of the WMF, provide some cover? Article 23's language would not be interpreted as providing Section-230-like protection, if I read EU law correctly. --Mike ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
On 3 June 2014 09:05, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:
Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something that
is improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their
knowledge, I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on English
Wikipedia.
I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set up
a framework which the community can use to decide which of several paths we
would like to take.
This is not my personal RfC, I just happen to think that with recent
discussions trending positively about VE's improvement over the past
several months and with the comments in this list about its possible value
to acquiring new editors, I'm willing to put in some time to draft a
framework for a discussion on-wiki. I am providing this note to let the
community know that someone (me) is drafting a framework for on-wiki
discussion. If someone else wants to start an RfC before I get around to
starting one, that's completely ok.
Cheers,
Pine
Without denigrating your considerable contributions to the project, Pine,
I'd suggest that anyone setting up an RFC on this issue should have more
recent experience with the product than you have, and I'd also suggest that
an RFC is premature until there is an indication from the WMF that *they*
feel the product might be ready for broader access. I don't think that a
fair discussion can be had when it is happening without, for example, a
clear understanding of what issues existed before and whether or not they
have been resolved. I hope you will reconsider - or perhaps actually test
the product for a couple of weeks before proceeding, so that the RFC can be
based on factual information rather than well, some people think it should
be enabled. There have always been some people who thought it should be
enabled. There have always been some people who think it is a waste of
engineering time and energy. But factual information about the current
status of the tool, complete with intelligent assessment of its features,
is what is really needed for the community to make a considered decision.
Risker/Anne
Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an RFC,
we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions. This
is what I would suggest.
- Create a sample article that includes an infobox, an image or two,
some references, a template or two, and at least three editable sections.
Editors will be asked to copy/paste this page into a personal sandbox to
carry out the experiment, so that their individual results can be observed
through the page history, and problems can be more easily identified.
- Identify about 15-20 *basic* editing tasks that an inexperienced
editor would be likely to try. Some that come to mind:
- Remove a word
- Add a word
- change spelling of a word
- add a link to another article
- remove a link to another article
- move a sentence within a section
- move a sentence across sections
- add a [new] reference (multiple tests for website, newspaper, book
references)
- edit an existing reference
- re-use an existing reference
- edit existing information in the infobox
- add a reference to the infobox
- add a new parameter to the infobox
- add an image
- remove an image
- add an image description
- modify an image description
- add a commonly used template (such as {{fact}})
- remove a template
- add several symbols and accented characters that are not available
on their standard keyboard (e.g., Euro and GBP symbols for US keyboards,
accented characters commonly used in German or French)
- Ask the testers to complete a chart outlining their results for each
of the editing tasks being tested, and any comments they have about each of
these editing features.
If we can persuade even 25 people to work through these basic tasks, and
the results are aggregated well, the community will have some useful data
on which to base next-steps decisions. It will also provide the
VisualEditor team with comparatively unbiased information about their
progress. The key emphasis in the experiment is that it should focus on
straightforward, elementary editing activities rather than complex tasks,
and the purpose is to see whether or not these features work in an expected
way or not.
Thoughts?
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] ASBS results
Thanks to the organizers and facilitators for setting up the process. And congratulations to Frieda and Patricio. I wish both of you every success, strength and support for your work on the Board! Alice. On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Frieda Brioschi ubifri...@gmail.com wrote: Wow, I'm breathless :- ..I've many to thank: * thank you voters for your choice, I'll do my best * thank you Wikimedia Italia for your support, it was really important to me * thank you Patricio, Alice and Anders, it was great sharing this experience with you * thank you Chris, Lorenzo and James for your work I'm looking forward to begin and I'll need your feedback, input and idea to make this adventure perfect. Frieda ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
Sounds like your suggestion would be a perfect contribution to some kind of
community discussion to try and decide a framework to decide if or when we
might want to re-deploy visual editor, much like Pine was suggesting in the
first place :-)
*Edward Saperia*
Chief Coordinator Wikimania London http://www.wikimanialondon.org
On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 June 2014 09:05, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:
Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something that
is improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their
knowledge, I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on
English
Wikipedia.
I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set up
a framework which the community can use to decide which of several
paths we
would like to take.
Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an RFC,
we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions. This
is what I would suggest.
- Create a sample article that includes an infobox, an image or two,
some references, a template or two, and at least three editable
sections.
Editors will be asked to copy/paste this page into a personal sandbox to
carry out the experiment, so that their individual results can be
observed
through the page history, and problems can be more easily identified.
- Identify about 15-20 *basic* editing tasks that an inexperienced
editor would be likely to try. Some that come to mind:
- Remove a word
- Add a word
- change spelling of a word
- add a link to another article
- remove a link to another article
- move a sentence within a section
- move a sentence across sections
- add a [new] reference (multiple tests for website, newspaper, book
references)
- edit an existing reference
- re-use an existing reference
- edit existing information in the infobox
- add a reference to the infobox
- add a new parameter to the infobox
- add an image
- remove an image
- add an image description
- modify an image description
- add a commonly used template (such as {{fact}})
- remove a template
- add several symbols and accented characters that are not available
on their standard keyboard (e.g., Euro and GBP symbols for US
keyboards,
accented characters commonly used in German or French)
- Ask the testers to complete a chart outlining their results for each
of the editing tasks being tested, and any comments they have about
each of
these editing features.
If we can persuade even 25 people to work through these basic tasks, and
the results are aggregated well, the community will have some useful data
on which to base next-steps decisions. It will also provide the
VisualEditor team with comparatively unbiased information about their
progress. The key emphasis in the experiment is that it should focus on
straightforward, elementary editing activities rather than complex tasks,
and the purpose is to see whether or not these features work in an expected
way or not.
Thoughts?
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
On 3 June 2014 12:25, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an RFC, we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions. This is what I would suggest. [snip a possible user test scenario] +1. Some sort of user testing like this would be fantastic. We might even be able to set it up so the Internet will do it for us, which will save WMF paying testers ... could do some serious A/B work too. There must be frameworks for this sort of thing ... VE team (cc James): so. How do you think this thing is now, getting to a year later? Performance? Robustness? Stability of code? - David, one of the most important features of this proposed test is that people who *know* what the results ought to look like are carrying out the testing. It is probably a good idea to have parallel testing with new or inexperienced users, but at the end of the day, it's experienced Wikipedians who are going to make the decision whether or not to open up availability of VisualEditor to an expanded user group, and they are the ones who have to believe that it is fit for purpose, at least for basic editing skills required by new users. I suspect that most Wikipedians will give much more regard to the documented experiences of editors whose reputations they know as compared to those who are brand new - and I include myself in that group. I've seen ringers sent in too often in different kinds of user tests (not necessarily Wikimedia-specific) to fully assume good faith. Risker/Anne ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
Thanks Ed. The point I am trying to make is that the community can't make
a good decision on this unless they understand the VisualEditor product as
it exists today. I think pretty much everyone agrees it wasn't ready for
default editing on 1 July 2013, but absent recent data most people would
naturally base their opinions on their personal experiences from that very
early period.
Risker/Anne
On 3 June 2014 12:15, Edward Saperia e...@wikimanialondon.org wrote:
Sounds like your suggestion would be a perfect contribution to some kind of
community discussion to try and decide a framework to decide if or when we
might want to re-deploy visual editor, much like Pine was suggesting in the
first place :-)
*Edward Saperia*
Chief Coordinator Wikimania London http://www.wikimanialondon.org
On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 June 2014 09:05, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 3 June 2014 03:02, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote:
Because VE has repeatedly been mentioned in this list as something
that
is improving and may help us with acquisition of editors and their
knowledge, I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on
English
Wikipedia.
I am not proposing any specific outcome in the RfC. My goal is to set
up
a framework which the community can use to decide which of several
paths we
would like to take.
Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an
RFC,
we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so
that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions.
This
is what I would suggest.
- Create a sample article that includes an infobox, an image or two,
some references, a template or two, and at least three editable
sections.
Editors will be asked to copy/paste this page into a personal sandbox
to
carry out the experiment, so that their individual results can be
observed
through the page history, and problems can be more easily identified.
- Identify about 15-20 *basic* editing tasks that an inexperienced
editor would be likely to try. Some that come to mind:
- Remove a word
- Add a word
- change spelling of a word
- add a link to another article
- remove a link to another article
- move a sentence within a section
- move a sentence across sections
- add a [new] reference (multiple tests for website, newspaper,
book
references)
- edit an existing reference
- re-use an existing reference
- edit existing information in the infobox
- add a reference to the infobox
- add a new parameter to the infobox
- add an image
- remove an image
- add an image description
- modify an image description
- add a commonly used template (such as {{fact}})
- remove a template
- add several symbols and accented characters that are not
available
on their standard keyboard (e.g., Euro and GBP symbols for US
keyboards,
accented characters commonly used in German or French)
- Ask the testers to complete a chart outlining their results for
each
of the editing tasks being tested, and any comments they have about
each of
these editing features.
If we can persuade even 25 people to work through these basic tasks, and
the results are aggregated well, the community will have some useful data
on which to base next-steps decisions. It will also provide the
VisualEditor team with comparatively unbiased information about their
progress. The key emphasis in the experiment is that it should focus on
straightforward, elementary editing activities rather than complex tasks,
and the purpose is to see whether or not these features work in an
expected
way or not.
Thoughts?
Risker/Anne
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/guidelineswikimedi...@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
On 3 June 2014 08:02, ENWP Pine deyntest...@hotmail.com wrote: I have started to draft an RfC about re-enabling VE on English Wikipedia URL? -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor on English Wikipedia
Hey Risker, Pine, David, all, On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:35 AM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 June 2014 12:25, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: On 3 June 2014 16:37, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Okay, further to what I've said aboveI think that before having an RFC, we should seek community assistance to carry out a small-scale study so that there is some evidence on which people can base their decisions. This is what I would suggest. [snip a possible user test scenario] +1. Some sort of user testing like this would be fantastic. We might even be able to set it up so the Internet will do it for us, which will save WMF paying testers ... could do some serious A/B work too. There must be frameworks for this sort of thing ... VE team (cc James): so. How do you think this thing is now, getting to a year later? Performance? Robustness? Stability of code? - David, one of the most important features of this proposed test is that people who *know* what the results ought to look like are carrying out the testing. It is probably a good idea to have parallel testing with new or inexperienced users, but at the end of the day, it's experienced Wikipedians who are going to make the decision whether or not to open up availability of VisualEditor to an expanded user group, and they are the ones who have to believe that it is fit for purpose, at least for basic editing skills required by new users. I suspect that most Wikipedians will give much more regard to the documented experiences of editors whose reputations they know as compared to those who are brand new - and I include myself in that group. I've seen ringers sent in too often in different kinds of user tests (not necessarily Wikimedia-specific) to fully assume good faith. Risker/Anne If anyone would like to have a look at what usability testing is being done for simple tasks, it's over on mediawiki[1]. Compare notes, use the talk page, feel free to discuss what's going on there. What is clear to me is that the community needs to spend some time discussing about how they would like to have the discussion. There have been various proposals on this mailing list and on-wiki about how to reintroduce VisualEditor for the new user, all of which have been quite interesting and diverse in approach. It's vital that a path going forward can be agreed upon by all of us, and community leadership and community lead discussion is key to this. The events of last year make this a delicate discussion to have; and I think a good place to start would be slow, deliberate brainstorming on-wiki. There were hundreds of participants in the last RfC and it's important that we take the time to think it though together rather than having competing formats, if you will Another thing that would be very useful would be better promotion from within the community to use Beta Features[2]. Conversations about developing features are what make products better :) 1. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Design/User_testing 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures -- Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Product Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Cost of Wikimedia Conference 2014
On 2 June 2014 14:38, Jon Davies jon.dav...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote: £2600, our current estimate, seems good value. Some bloke is charging me £120 to come and tell me my dishwasher is broken These things are hard to calculate. You could however get a Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro and a Tamron 150-600mm for that price. (incidentally the macro lens could be used to get a better version of this pic https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Domitianus_II_obverse_ashmolean.JPG I don't have anything long enough) -- geni ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On 03/06/2014 12:53, Mark wrote: On 6/2/14, 10:55 PM, ??? wrote: There is no public interest in how many time celeb X got a detention at school for not doing their homework at junior high. Isn't that the kind of information you would in fact expect to find in a biography of any kind of public figure? If I were reading a biography of Winston Churchill or Louis Armstrong or Neil Armstrong or anyone else prominent enough to have a book-length biography written about them, I would typically expect it to include a chapter about their childhood, and that would normally include some details of how they did at school, if such details are known. That's precisely the kind of information that biographers search for when putting together a comprehensive biography. WP is not creating books, and it is mostly NOT creating articles about major figures of the 20th century. It is not constructing comprehensive biographies. It is mostly creating short articles about people of slight notability from scant sources, where perhaps their school detention is the one of the few things extant about them. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 5:23 PM, ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote: On 03/06/2014 12:53, Mark wrote: On 6/2/14, 10:55 PM, ??? wrote: There is no public interest in how many time celeb X got a detention at school for not doing their homework at junior high. Isn't that the kind of information you would in fact expect to find in a biography of any kind of public figure? If I were reading a biography of Winston Churchill or Louis Armstrong or Neil Armstrong or anyone else prominent enough to have a book-length biography written about them, I would typically expect it to include a chapter about their childhood, and that would normally include some details of how they did at school, if such details are known. That's precisely the kind of information that biographers search for when putting together a comprehensive biography. WP is not creating books, and it is mostly NOT creating articles about major figures of the 20th century. It is not constructing comprehensive biographies. It is mostly creating short articles about people of slight notability from scant sources, where perhaps their school detention is the one of the few things extant about them. Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is the main feature of the article? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives
Minutes and slides from last week's quarterly review of the Foundation's Mobile Contributions team are now available at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Mobile_contributions/May_2014 . On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Hi folks, to increase accountability and create more opportunities for course corrections and resourcing adjustments as necessary, Sue's asked me and Howie Fung to set up a quarterly project evaluation process, starting with our highest priority initiatives. These are, according to Sue's narrowing focus recommendations which were approved by the Board [1]: - Visual Editor - Mobile (mobile contributions + Wikipedia Zero) - Editor Engagement (also known as the E2 and E3 teams) - Funds Dissemination Committe and expanded grant-making capacity I'm proposing the following initial schedule: January: - Editor Engagement Experiments February: - Visual Editor - Mobile (Contribs + Zero) March: - Editor Engagement Features (Echo, Flow projects) - Funds Dissemination Committee We’ll try doing this on the same day or adjacent to the monthly metrics meetings [2], since the team(s) will give a presentation on their recent progress, which will help set some context that would otherwise need to be covered in the quarterly review itself. This will also create open opportunities for feedback and questions. My goal is to do this in a manner where even though the quarterly review meetings themselves are internal, the outcomes are captured as meeting minutes and shared publicly, which is why I'm starting this discussion on a public list as well. I've created a wiki page here which we can use to discuss the concept further: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews The internal review will, at minimum, include: Sue Gardner myself Howie Fung Team members and relevant director(s) Designated minute-taker So for example, for Visual Editor, the review team would be the Visual Editor / Parsoid teams, Sue, me, Howie, Terry, and a minute-taker. I imagine the structure of the review roughly as follows, with a duration of about 2 1/2 hours divided into 25-30 minute blocks: - Brief team intro and recap of team's activities through the quarter, compared with goals - Drill into goals and targets: Did we achieve what we said we would? - Review of challenges, blockers and successes - Discussion of proposed changes (e.g. resourcing, targets) and other action items - Buffer time, debriefing Once again, the primary purpose of these reviews is to create improved structures for internal accountability, escalation points in cases where serious changes are necessary, and transparency to the world. In addition to these priority initiatives, my recommendation would be to conduct quarterly reviews for any activity that requires more than a set amount of resources (people/dollars). These additional reviews may however be conducted in a more lightweight manner and internally to the departments. We’re slowly getting into that habit in engineering. As we pilot this process, the format of the high priority reviews can help inform and support reviews across the organization. Feedback and questions are appreciated. All best, Erik [1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Vote:Narrowing_Focus [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation Support Free Knowledge: https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On 03/06/2014 22:35, Nathan wrote: Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is the main feature of the article? How about this 8 yo? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Emmanuel_of_Belgium#Biography What about these other kids? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Louise_Windsor#Early_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanta_Sof%C3%ADa_of_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hisahito_of_Akishino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Elisabeth,_Duchess_of_Brabant ... ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:54 PM, ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote: On 03/06/2014 22:35, Nathan wrote: Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is the main feature of the article? How about this 8 yo? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Emmanuel_of_Belgium#Biography What about these other kids? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Louise_Windsor#Early_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanta_Sof%C3%ADa_of_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hisahito_of_Akishino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Elisabeth,_Duchess_of_Brabant ... Thanks! I was unable to locate any mention of school detentions in any of the articles you linked. I was able to determine that one is the heir to the throne of Belgium, another the granddaughter of the Queen of England, another the daughter of the soon-to-be King of Spain, one will likely become Emperor of Japan and lastly Prince Emmanuel is the son of the King of Belgium and the younger sibling of the eventual Queen. So I do not yet see your point, which I think is that WP processes trivial personal information about non-notable individuals in whom few people have any interest. Perhaps you neglected to include the articles you mentioned where school detentions are one of the few things extant about the subjects? ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Applying the Right to Be Forgotten to Wikipedia (Was Re: Right to be forgotten)
On 04/06/2014 00:06, Nathan wrote: On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 6:54 PM, ??? wiki-l...@phizz.demon.co.uk wrote: On 03/06/2014 22:35, Nathan wrote: Interesting. Can you link me to a biography where a school detention is the main feature of the article? How about this 8 yo? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Emmanuel_of_Belgium#Biography What about these other kids? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Louise_Windsor#Early_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanta_Sof%C3%ADa_of_Spain https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Hisahito_of_Akishino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Elisabeth,_Duchess_of_Brabant ... Thanks! I was unable to locate any mention of school detentions in any of the articles you linked. I was able to determine that one is the heir to the throne of Belgium, another the granddaughter of the Queen of England, another the daughter of the soon-to-be King of Spain, one will likely become Emperor of Japan and lastly Prince Emmanuel is the son of the King of Belgium and the younger sibling of the eventual Queen. So I do not yet see your point, which I think is that WP processes trivial personal information about non-notable individuals in whom few people have any interest. Perhaps you neglected to include the articles you mentioned where school detentions are one of the few things extant about the subjects? These are pre-teen kids, the information that is being collated is trivia and intrusive. Fell and broke arm, taken out of main stream education, went to a Science Museum, able to change his own clothes, went to see a musical. And if you can't see that this is equivalent to didn't do hos homework all one can say is Oh dear! ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funds Dissemination Committee seeking nominations for new members
Greetings, all: Here's a reminder that the FDC staff will be doing an IRC office hours in 12 minutes time (and counting!) about the FDC nominations on the #wikimedia-office channel. [1] We'll hold another office hours later today (though it might be tomorrow, depending on your timezone) at 16:00 UTC, Wednesday June 4. Looking forward to speaking with you and answering questions you may have about FDC membership and nominations! Katy Love [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 7:51 PM, Anasuya Sengupta asengu...@wikimedia.org wrote: tl;dr Self-nominations invited for four Board-appointed members of the FDC. Nominate here.[3] Dear members of the Wikimedia community, The Funds Dissemination Committee Advisory Group (FDC AG) met recently in Frankfurt to recommend to the Executive Director (ED) of the Wikimedia Foundation whether the FDC - the nine member volunteer committee reviewing annual plan grants or allocations for Wikimedia and allied organisations - should continue or not, after the first two years of its existence.[1] The detailed recommendations of the FDC AG will be shared with the Executive Director and the community shortly, but we are happy to announce that the AG recommends that the FDC continues to exist with some suggested improvements to the process. The final decision on the FDC will be taken by the ED and the Board of WMF over the next few months (the FDC Framework’s timeline suggests August), but the AG’s overall recommendation is a testimony to the deep commitment and energy of the current FDC and the community members who have participated in this unique peer-review grantmaking process. Thank you. Without anticipating the ED and Board’s decision, we would like to move forward with the process of renewing the current FDC with four Board-appointed members of the FDC so that a full FDC is in place by August 2014. As per the Framework,[2] four of the current committee members will be ending their two year terms in July, and four new members will be appointed by the WMF Board to fill these vacancies. I write to ask those of you interested in joining the FDC to signal your interest on Meta by self-nominating by end of day UTC June 15.[3] The schedule for the nominations process is as follows: * May 30 - June 15: Self nominations to join the FDC. Candidates indicate their interest through a short paragraph about themselves, and respond to an initial set of questions from the FDC staff * June 1 - June 30: Public question and answer [4] from community members to candidates * June 24 - July 3: FDC staff in consultation with the FDC Board representatives (Bishakha Datta and Patricio Lorente) interview a sub-set of nominated candidates * July 3: Shortlist of candidates announced * July 4 - 10: Decision on final four FDC candidates by the Board reps in consultation with the full Board * July 11: Public announcement to community of the four new members * August: Based on the ED and Board’s decision on the FDC’s existence, orientation of the new FDC at Wikimania To be eligible to join the FDC, members need to meet the requirements below, as outlined by the Framework.[5] They must: * have sufficient time and dedication to commit to this time-heavy process, including attending two 4-6 day face-to-face meetings (likely in mid-May and mid-November) and be able to meet the expectations outlined in more detail on the nominations page * have a track record of constructive engagement in community discussions and an orientation toward collaborative problem solving * be able to set aside any conflicts of interest and work towards the mission goals of the Wikimedia movement without considering individual or organizational interests * be over 21 years in age and over the age of majority in their home country * be able to work effectively in English (note that full fluency is not required) * present to WMF appropriate personal identification * Staff / board members of entities requesting funds from the FDC may serve on the FDC; however, they must recuse themselves from deliberations pertaining to their entity's application. The *skills and attributes* being sought for in FDC members include: * Experience directing or evaluating programs; * Grant-making expertise (either as a grantee or grantor of funds); * Exposure to, understanding of, and personal credibility in the Wikimedia movement (experience across different Wikimedia projects as well as experience in programs, chapters, or administrative roles within the Wikimedia movement); * Gender, geographic and linguistic diversity. There are no term limits for FDC members, and current members may choose to re-apply for the FDC. The members whose terms end this July are Anders Wennersten, Arjuna Rao Chavala, Mike Peel (current Secretary), and Yuri Perohanych. The members who continue on the FDC for another year are Ali
Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Signpost is (sort of) published
On 02/06/14 20:14, Andy Mabbett wrote:
On 2 June 2014 19:39, Ed Erhart the.e...@gmail.com wrote:
There is one person in charge of making the final calls of every issue—me.
This is troubling, Wikipedia is supposed to be an open,
community-driven initiative.
We've seen problems in the past with single-person gatekeepers; at
TFA, for instance.
Not that I'm casting aspersions, but you may be indisposed, and a
future keyholder may turn out to be rogue.
It was an unfortunate error that I did not give the password to
other trusted Signposters, but as Pine says, that is no longer the case.
That, at least, is reassuring.
Wikipedia is exactly that, an open, community-driven initiative. This is
why when something needs doing, in many cases any random bloke can come
in and do it - the {{sofixit}} narrative. Of course, as a result, things
are also often not necessarily as well-organised as they perhaps could
be, and there may only be a single person involved, but why should this
be a problem when such is only the beginning?
Most nothing will be well-organised at first, but as time goes on, as a
project matures and others join in, problems come to light and are
fixed. If an initial lack of organisation or a potentiality for issues
down the road were considered a barrier to doing stuff, nothing would
ever get done. We certainly wouldn't have a Wikipedia.
I'd say that what has happened here has if anything been a good example
of that the process really does work, and I'd like to thank those
involved for taking the initiative to keep things running smoothly. This
is what keeps all the projects running, when you get right down to it.
-I
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
