Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
Link does not work. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Askin Sent: 16 July 2014 04:00 AM To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey We are looking for Wikipedians to participate in a survey. The survey is designed to help us understand group decision-making and Wikipedia’s Articles for Deletion (AfD) process. The research is being carried out under the terms of the University of Western Ontario - Code of Conduct; it will not lead to any sales follow up; no individual (or organization) will be identified in our reporting. If you are an adult Wikipedian, we would be grateful if you could spare approximately 10-15 minutes to complete this survey. As a token of our gratitude, for each completed survey we will make a charitable donation of CAD$2 to the Wikimedia Foundation. If you have any questions, please contact Lu Xiao at lxiao24 (at) uwo.ca. To start the survey please click ONCE on the link below: http:// fluidsurveys.com/s/WikipediaSurvey/ Please try to complete the survey by August 1, 2014. Thank you very much for your time, we really value your input. Sincerely, UWO Wikipedia Research Team ___ 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 - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4716 / Virus Database: 3986/7858 - Release Date: 07/15/14 ___ 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] AFD survey
the http:// part has been left out. Correct link is http://fluidsurveys.com/s/WikipediaSurvey/ Regards Sir48/Thyge 2014-07-16 8:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net: Link does not work. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Askin Sent: 16 July 2014 04:00 AM To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey We are looking for Wikipedians to participate in a survey. The survey is designed to help us understand group decision-making and Wikipedia’s Articles for Deletion (AfD) process. The research is being carried out under the terms of the University of Western Ontario - Code of Conduct; it will not lead to any sales follow up; no individual (or organization) will be identified in our reporting. If you are an adult Wikipedian, we would be grateful if you could spare approximately 10-15 minutes to complete this survey. As a token of our gratitude, for each completed survey we will make a charitable donation of CAD$2 to the Wikimedia Foundation. If you have any questions, please contact Lu Xiao at lxiao24 (at) uwo.ca. To start the survey please click ONCE on the link below: http:// fluidsurveys.com/s/WikipediaSurvey/ Please try to complete the survey by August 1, 2014. Thank you very much for your time, we really value your input. Sincerely, UWO Wikipedia Research Team ___ 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 - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4716 / Virus Database: 3986/7858 - Release Date: 07/15/14 ___ 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] AFD survey
Dear UWO Wikipedia Research Team, Your survey does not appear to have been approved by the Wikimedia Research Committee (RCom). You can find contact details at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_Committee. Due to concerns with regard to privacy, such as recording their IP address against statements of their Wikipedia activities, Wikimedians are not encouraged to participate in unapproved surveys. I doubt that many Wikipedians would want to separately find and analyse the UWO Code of Conduct to check what is tracked or not, and they would need to do this before opening the fluidsurveys.com website. I note that this website is not apparently owned by the UWO, but is a private site that is unlikely to be legally bound by UWO codes of conduct. Fae On 16/07/2014, Thyge ltl.pri...@gmail.com wrote: the http:// part has been left out. Correct link is http://fluidsurveys.com/s/WikipediaSurvey/ Regards Sir48/Thyge 2014-07-16 8:29 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood peter.southw...@telkomsa.net: Link does not work. Cheers, Peter -Original Message- From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Nicole Askin Sent: 16 July 2014 04:00 AM To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey We are looking for Wikipedians to participate in a survey. The survey is designed to help us understand group decision-making and Wikipedia’s Articles for Deletion (AfD) process. The research is being carried out under the terms of the University of Western Ontario - Code of Conduct; it will not lead to any sales follow up; no individual (or organization) will be identified in our reporting. If you are an adult Wikipedian, we would be grateful if you could spare approximately 10-15 minutes to complete this survey. As a token of our gratitude, for each completed survey we will make a charitable donation of CAD$2 to the Wikimedia Foundation. If you have any questions, please contact Lu Xiao at lxiao24 (at) uwo.ca. To start the survey please click ONCE on the link below: http:// fluidsurveys.com/s/WikipediaSurvey/ Please try to complete the survey by August 1, 2014. Thank you very much for your time, we really value your input. Sincerely, UWO Wikipedia Research Team ___ 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 - No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 2014.0.4716 / Virus Database: 3986/7858 - Release Date: 07/15/14 ___ 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 -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote. ___ 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] AFD survey
Thanks. All questions were generic and about Wikipedia, so I answered with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is perhaps the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting: the experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret it. :-) See http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123334.html I had problems with two questions: * Are you concerned that somebody would change or remove your rationale? Please choose the most applicable response. This question assumes that removing a comment is bad; I would have answered Yes when appropriate per law or policy but there was no such option. * Do you read the rationales in the discussion before making the final decision? This assumes that this is just a matter of personal taste; sometimes policy and process requires it, sometimes not. (For instance in the classic it.wiki deletion process, but certainly also in some specific sub-process triggers on en.wiki and others.) Nemo ___ 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] AFD survey
In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4 years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of admins who regularly maintains the deletion process. 2014-07-16 10:20 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: Thanks. All questions were generic and about Wikipedia, so I answered with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is perhaps the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting: the experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret it. :-) See http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123334.html I had problems with two questions: * Are you concerned that somebody would change or remove your rationale? Please choose the most applicable response. This question assumes that removing a comment is bad; I would have answered Yes when appropriate per law or policy but there was no such option. * Do you read the rationales in the discussion before making the final decision? This assumes that this is just a matter of personal taste; sometimes policy and process requires it, sometimes not. (For instance in the classic it.wiki deletion process, but certainly also in some specific sub-process triggers on en.wiki and others.) Nemo ___ 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 -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz ___ 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] AFD survey
If the people who have created this survey can fix the problems raised by Fae, I'd be happy to share this with several language Wikipedians in India. I'm sure that at this point nobody would want to be part of it. On Jul 16, 2014 1:54 PM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4 years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of admins who regularly maintains the deletion process. 2014-07-16 10:20 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: Thanks. All questions were generic and about Wikipedia, so I answered with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is perhaps the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting: the experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret it. :-) See http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123334.html I had problems with two questions: * Are you concerned that somebody would change or remove your rationale? Please choose the most applicable response. This question assumes that removing a comment is bad; I would have answered Yes when appropriate per law or policy but there was no such option. * Do you read the rationales in the discussion before making the final decision? This assumes that this is just a matter of personal taste; sometimes policy and process requires it, sometimes not. (For instance in the classic it.wiki deletion process, but certainly also in some specific sub-process triggers on en.wiki and others.) Nemo ___ 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 -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz ___ 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
[Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot i Wall street jpournal and BBC world
Wall Street Journal (online) [1] had two days ago a long article on Lsjbot, yesterday being their fourth most read article. it was followed up yesterday by articles in media in Brazil, Poland, (arabian paper), France, Australia Huffington Post etc It will now in a few hours time be an interview in BBC World New with Sverker (Lsjbot owner) where also Jimmy Wales will participate Anders Lsbot has for this round today generated over 100 000 articles on plant species, and progessing with around 1 a day An example [2] [1] http://online.wsj.com/articles/for-this-author-10-000-wikipedia-articles-is-a-good-days-work-1405305001 [2] https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyathea_dregei http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/07/15/sverker-johansson-wikiped_n_5587008.html ___ 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] AFD survey
English hasn't used voting for a long time either. AfD discussions are closed based on strength of argument and compliance with policy. On Jul 16, 2014 2:24 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4 years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of admins who regularly maintains the deletion process. 2014-07-16 10:20 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: Thanks. All questions were generic and about Wikipedia, so I answered with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is perhaps the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting: the experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret it. :-) See http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123334.html I had problems with two questions: * Are you concerned that somebody would change or remove your rationale? Please choose the most applicable response. This question assumes that removing a comment is bad; I would have answered Yes when appropriate per law or policy but there was no such option. * Do you read the rationales in the discussion before making the final decision? This assumes that this is just a matter of personal taste; sometimes policy and process requires it, sometimes not. (For instance in the classic it.wiki deletion process, but certainly also in some specific sub-process triggers on en.wiki and others.) Nemo ___ 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 -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz ___ 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] Lsjbot i Wall street jpournal and BBC world
Anders, On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: Whilst you are doing some good things with these bot-created articles, I do have some concerns. Mainly, the fact that there is no human intervention in the creation process. I have found myself having to remove, frankly speaking, useless galleries on some of the articles created by your bot. Take Mexico on Cebuano WP[1] which had a gallery made up of images from [[Category:Mexico]] (the country) on Commons. The Commonscat link on that article also links to the Commons category for the country. Or the Cebuano article for Astraeus[2] which had a gallery made up of images relating to Astraeus Airlines. The Commonscat link is also the airline, and the images were pulled from that article. What sort of quality control is occurring to ensure that this isn't widespreadthese are not the only examples I've had to remove imagery totally unrelated to the subject, and makes me question whether having a bot creating hundreds of thousands of stubbish articles is really the best way to go about content creation. Russavia [1] https://ceb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mexico_(mga_mananap)oldid=42452802 [2] https://ceb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Astraeusoldid=4367459 ___ 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] AFD survey
I would suggest that it doesn't become not a vote merely by not calling it a vote. I note all the closes that count !votes and how the not-voting pattern on a given AFD is frequently brought up at DRV. On 16 July 2014 12:25, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote: English hasn't used voting for a long time either. AfD discussions are closed based on strength of argument and compliance with policy. On Jul 16, 2014 2:24 AM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4 years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of admins who regularly maintains the deletion process. 2014-07-16 10:20 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: Thanks. All questions were generic and about Wikipedia, so I answered with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is perhaps the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting: the experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret it. :-) See http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123334.html I had problems with two questions: * Are you concerned that somebody would change or remove your rationale? Please choose the most applicable response. This question assumes that removing a comment is bad; I would have answered Yes when appropriate per law or policy but there was no such option. * Do you read the rationales in the discussion before making the final decision? This assumes that this is just a matter of personal taste; sometimes policy and process requires it, sometimes not. (For instance in the classic it.wiki deletion process, but certainly also in some specific sub-process triggers on en.wiki and others.) Nemo ___ 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 -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz ___ 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 ___ 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] AFD survey
Hello, I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board contact me. I asked the researcher about RCOM and other things. This person said they posted to RCOM, but the Meta page states that submissions should receive responses within 1-2 weeks, and yet our messages went unanswered. We have institutional ethics approval, but that doesn't last indefinitely, and so after receiving no response we opted to go ahead. I am not going to share more than this publicly, but in short, I talked with the researcher to the limit of their interest and they feel that they must proceed with the research. Their oversight is at http://www.uwo.ca/research/about/research_offices.html Their RCOM page is at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:The_Use_of_Rationales_in_Wikipedia_Articles_for_Deletion_Discussions_and_in_Group_Decision_Making My concern here, as with many surveys, is that the researcher greatly values their time and assigns less value to Wikipedia community time, and is comfortable asking for lots of volunteer time on the pretense of helping our community. This kind of research is, in my opinion, not helpful to Wikipedians because the questions make no sense due to having been designed by an outsider, and additionally so many people have these same questions and only want to target our most active and busiest and valuable volunteers. Furthermore there is no compliance here with community values in research. Bad surveys create survey fatigue, in which volunteers are later disinclined to participate in good and useful community-approved research. If anyone sees research problems in the future I am interested in talking about these things. I have been thinking of becoming more involved in supporting RCOM for some time. The basic problem is that practically all researchers assume that the number of highly active Wikipedians is huge, and therefore, they imagine no problem for them to ask for any amount of volunteer time to be diverted from Wikipedia to their personal and private collection of survey data. The reality is that there are not more than hundreds or low thousands of Wikipedians who are active to the extent they imagine. This survey is targeting English AfD, where I imagine there are only low hundreds of at most of continually active participants, and the reality may be much lower participation than that. I asked this researcher to discontinue the survey pending a check on the impact of it on the Wikipedia community. I said this because I feel they are out of compliance with even the soft suggestions in research that are available, and they know this. yours, On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan srik.r...@wikimedia.in wrote: If the people who have created this survey can fix the problems raised by Fae, I'd be happy to share this with several language Wikipedians in India. I'm sure that at this point nobody would want to be part of it. On Jul 16, 2014 1:54 PM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4 years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of admins who regularly maintains the deletion process. 2014-07-16 10:20 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: Thanks. All questions were generic and about Wikipedia, so I answered with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is perhaps the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting: the experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret it. :-) See http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123334.html I had problems with two questions: * Are you concerned that somebody would change or remove your rationale? Please choose the most applicable response. This question assumes that removing a comment is bad; I would have answered Yes when appropriate per law or policy but there was no such option. * Do you read the rationales in the discussion before making the final decision? This assumes that this is just a matter of personal taste; sometimes policy and process requires it, sometimes not. (For instance in the classic it.wiki deletion process, but certainly also in some specific sub-process triggers on en.wiki and others.) Nemo ___ 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 -- Tomek Polimerek Ganicz http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/ http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29title=tomasz-ganicz
Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
David Gerard, 16/07/2014 13:34: I would suggest that it doesn't become not a vote merely by not calling it a vote. I note all the closes that count !votes and how the not-voting pattern on a given AFD is frequently brought up at DRV. Sure, but calling it a vote makes it a vote. If it's explicitly a vote by policy, then there won't be such complaints. :-) AFAIK deletion has never been a vote by policy on en.wiki. Nemo ___ 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] AFD survey
On 16 July 2014 12:39, Lane Rasberry l...@bluerasberry.com wrote: ... I asked this researcher to discontinue the survey pending a check on the impact of it on the Wikipedia community. I said this because I feel they are out of compliance with even the soft suggestions in research that are available, and they know this. Good point. If anyone wanted to research deletion discussion patterns and outcomes on the English Wikipedia or other projects, I could knock out a nice analysis using a little passive but intelligent bot work depending on their requirements. I'm easy to find. I'm pretty sure this would be a lot cheaper in volunteer time or research time than creating surveys to answer very similar questions, particularly if the resulting report were freely published so that volunteers could give their subjective value responses to that instead. Fae -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae ___ 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] AFD survey
Good points, Lane. Such things were possibly discussed before, but it's the first time that I see it it spelled out like this. This approach should be advertised a bit somehow, so that the researchers know how to do it ethically and for everybody's benefit, and so that the experienced Wikipedians would know not to start answering such surveys. -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore 2014-07-16 14:39 GMT+03:00 Lane Rasberry l...@bluerasberry.com: Hello, I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board contact me. I asked the researcher about RCOM and other things. This person said they posted to RCOM, but the Meta page states that submissions should receive responses within 1-2 weeks, and yet our messages went unanswered. We have institutional ethics approval, but that doesn't last indefinitely, and so after receiving no response we opted to go ahead. I am not going to share more than this publicly, but in short, I talked with the researcher to the limit of their interest and they feel that they must proceed with the research. Their oversight is at http://www.uwo.ca/research/about/research_offices.html Their RCOM page is at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:The_Use_of_Rationales_in_Wikipedia_Articles_for_Deletion_Discussions_and_in_Group_Decision_Making My concern here, as with many surveys, is that the researcher greatly values their time and assigns less value to Wikipedia community time, and is comfortable asking for lots of volunteer time on the pretense of helping our community. This kind of research is, in my opinion, not helpful to Wikipedians because the questions make no sense due to having been designed by an outsider, and additionally so many people have these same questions and only want to target our most active and busiest and valuable volunteers. Furthermore there is no compliance here with community values in research. Bad surveys create survey fatigue, in which volunteers are later disinclined to participate in good and useful community-approved research. If anyone sees research problems in the future I am interested in talking about these things. I have been thinking of becoming more involved in supporting RCOM for some time. The basic problem is that practically all researchers assume that the number of highly active Wikipedians is huge, and therefore, they imagine no problem for them to ask for any amount of volunteer time to be diverted from Wikipedia to their personal and private collection of survey data. The reality is that there are not more than hundreds or low thousands of Wikipedians who are active to the extent they imagine. This survey is targeting English AfD, where I imagine there are only low hundreds of at most of continually active participants, and the reality may be much lower participation than that. I asked this researcher to discontinue the survey pending a check on the impact of it on the Wikipedia community. I said this because I feel they are out of compliance with even the soft suggestions in research that are available, and they know this. yours, On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan srik.r...@wikimedia.in wrote: If the people who have created this survey can fix the problems raised by Fae, I'd be happy to share this with several language Wikipedians in India. I'm sure that at this point nobody would want to be part of it. On Jul 16, 2014 1:54 PM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4 years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of admins who regularly maintains the deletion process. 2014-07-16 10:20 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com: Thanks. All questions were generic and about Wikipedia, so I answered with the Italian Wikipedia in mind. Also note that it.wiki is perhaps the only wiki which switched deletions from voting to non-voting: the experiment was already done, you only need to measure and interpret it. :-) See http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2013-January/123334.html I had problems with two questions: * Are you concerned that somebody would change or remove your rationale? Please choose the most applicable response. This question assumes that removing a comment is bad; I would have answered Yes when appropriate per law or policy but there was no such option. * Do you read the rationales in the discussion before making the final decision? This assumes that this is just a matter of personal taste; sometimes policy and process requires it, sometimes not. (For instance in the
Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
On 07/16/2014 07:44 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote: AFAIK deletion has never been a vote by policy on en.wiki. No, but it almost always devolves to a vote de facto. Interestingly enough, that particular question (did you close discussions by counting show of hand vs evaluating the rationales) appears in the survey, which shows that they are at least aware of the dichotomy. -- Marc ___ 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] Lsjbot i Wall street jpournal and BBC world
I agree. It may be a good solution to patch the losing of editors... if there is no plan for community support. On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: Anders, On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:08 PM, Anders Wennersten m...@anderswennersten.se wrote: Whilst you are doing some good things with these bot-created articles, I do have some concerns. Mainly, the fact that there is no human intervention in the creation process. I have found myself having to remove, frankly speaking, useless galleries on some of the articles created by your bot. Take Mexico on Cebuano WP[1] which had a gallery made up of images from [[Category:Mexico]] (the country) on Commons. The Commonscat link on that article also links to the Commons category for the country. Or the Cebuano article for Astraeus[2] which had a gallery made up of images relating to Astraeus Airlines. The Commonscat link is also the airline, and the images were pulled from that article. What sort of quality control is occurring to ensure that this isn't widespreadthese are not the only examples I've had to remove imagery totally unrelated to the subject, and makes me question whether having a bot creating hundreds of thousands of stubbish articles is really the best way to go about content creation. Russavia [1] https://ceb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mexico_(mga_mananap)oldid=42452802 [2] https://ceb.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Astraeusoldid=4367459 ___ 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 -- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Wikipedia: Ilario https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ilario Facebook: Ilario Valdelli https://www.facebook.com/ivaldelli Twitter: Ilario Valdelli https://twitter.com/ilariovaldelli Linkedin: Ilario Valdelli http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=6724469 Tel: +41764821371 http://www.wikimedia.ch ___ 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] On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014
I am finally able to share with you the biggest benefit of WMRS Microgrants projects for this year. It's about cooperation with one very old institution, and it was necessary to wait for their formal letter. But first about the side effects of the Microgrants project... When you are going outside and tell people that you are willing to support their projects, it could lead into interesting outcomes. It is important to understand possibilities which could be opened and catch them. We got one interesting proposal. It was about a long term project of making photos of one person. The project was very interesting, but it turned out that it's not suitable to be supported by Wikimedia, as well as the amount of needed money is so small, that I am able to fund it personally. However, that was not the end. That guy, an amateur photographer (with professional skills) is actually the top Serbian lector. He proofread the Orthography of Serbian language. He is also a lexicographer, working in Matica srpska [1]. So, we met in my office. While drinking some alcohol, besides his own project, we were talking about the state of Serbian lexicography and culture in general. We were talking about Matica srpska, as well; about present financial state of the institution, which has money for salaries and the most important projects, but doesn't have for a number of projects. I had bold ideas, of course, but I was quite skeptical about rational possibility of cooperation between WMRS and Matica srpska. However, he convinced me that the president of MS is likely willing to cooperate and that we should talk about that. So he told me that he'll arrange the meeting with the president and that we should talk about that. Few weeks later I led WMRS delegation (our ED Mile and our program manager Ivana were in the delegation) to the initial talks with MS. I think we were talking two hours. And I am quite confident to tell you that on June 20th, 2014 happened one historical event, not just for Wikimedia Serbia, but also for Serbian culture and free knowledge. I wasn't able to talk about this till today, when we got formal letter from MS, which summarize our meeting and emphases their commitment to accessibility of knowledge to as much people as it's possible. If you are in Slavic culture in general, you should know what Matica srpska is. As the most of you are not, here is the story in short... MS is the oldest cultural and scientific institution in Serbia. They are the main lexicographical and encyclopedistic institution in Serbia. It isn't easily comparable with large cultures, but, basically, if we don't count independent institutions, 90% of dictionaries and the most important encyclopedias have been created inside of MS or with MS as the leader of the project. We share one important trait with the institutions like MS is. It's about long term goals. We want to start cooperation and develop it. So, we are starting with cooperation slowly. During the next year our goal is to liberate two dictionaries. One is ornithological, the other one covers dialects of Vojvodina. That's just the beginning, of course. Their editions are the main dictionaries of Serbian language and we'll discuss the next year about the steps toward liberating them. They are also in charge for creation of national encyclopedia, but it has its own Board and during the next months we should start talking with the Board, as well. The significance of this cooperation for Wikimedia is that we are at the beginning of the first close relations with one main national cultural institution, which focus is creating dictionaries and encyclopedias. They share our goals, as well as they want to cooperate with us. And it's not just about liberating content because we will help it financially. It's their commitment, as well. They want to share their content on Internet. With our (technological, licensing etc.) help, they will become the institution which shares their content by default, no matter if we are involved or not. I know that this story is not applicable in many cases. It's not rational to expect that the University of Oxford would do the same. However, I am sure that this story *is* applicable in many cultures of the similar size, like Serbian is. It is also important that the visibility of Wikimedia organizations all over the world is very important. You could get something very valuable if you show that you are friendly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matica_srpska ___ 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] On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014
Great work! On 16 July 2014 16:31, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote: I am finally able to share with you the biggest benefit of WMRS Microgrants projects for this year. It's about cooperation with one very old institution, and it was necessary to wait for their formal letter. But first about the side effects of the Microgrants project... When you are going outside and tell people that you are willing to support their projects, it could lead into interesting outcomes. It is important to understand possibilities which could be opened and catch them. We got one interesting proposal. It was about a long term project of making photos of one person. The project was very interesting, but it turned out that it's not suitable to be supported by Wikimedia, as well as the amount of needed money is so small, that I am able to fund it personally. However, that was not the end. That guy, an amateur photographer (with professional skills) is actually the top Serbian lector. He proofread the Orthography of Serbian language. He is also a lexicographer, working in Matica srpska [1]. So, we met in my office. While drinking some alcohol, besides his own project, we were talking about the state of Serbian lexicography and culture in general. We were talking about Matica srpska, as well; about present financial state of the institution, which has money for salaries and the most important projects, but doesn't have for a number of projects. I had bold ideas, of course, but I was quite skeptical about rational possibility of cooperation between WMRS and Matica srpska. However, he convinced me that the president of MS is likely willing to cooperate and that we should talk about that. So he told me that he'll arrange the meeting with the president and that we should talk about that. Few weeks later I led WMRS delegation (our ED Mile and our program manager Ivana were in the delegation) to the initial talks with MS. I think we were talking two hours. And I am quite confident to tell you that on June 20th, 2014 happened one historical event, not just for Wikimedia Serbia, but also for Serbian culture and free knowledge. I wasn't able to talk about this till today, when we got formal letter from MS, which summarize our meeting and emphases their commitment to accessibility of knowledge to as much people as it's possible. If you are in Slavic culture in general, you should know what Matica srpska is. As the most of you are not, here is the story in short... MS is the oldest cultural and scientific institution in Serbia. They are the main lexicographical and encyclopedistic institution in Serbia. It isn't easily comparable with large cultures, but, basically, if we don't count independent institutions, 90% of dictionaries and the most important encyclopedias have been created inside of MS or with MS as the leader of the project. We share one important trait with the institutions like MS is. It's about long term goals. We want to start cooperation and develop it. So, we are starting with cooperation slowly. During the next year our goal is to liberate two dictionaries. One is ornithological, the other one covers dialects of Vojvodina. That's just the beginning, of course. Their editions are the main dictionaries of Serbian language and we'll discuss the next year about the steps toward liberating them. They are also in charge for creation of national encyclopedia, but it has its own Board and during the next months we should start talking with the Board, as well. The significance of this cooperation for Wikimedia is that we are at the beginning of the first close relations with one main national cultural institution, which focus is creating dictionaries and encyclopedias. They share our goals, as well as they want to cooperate with us. And it's not just about liberating content because we will help it financially. It's their commitment, as well. They want to share their content on Internet. With our (technological, licensing etc.) help, they will become the institution which shares their content by default, no matter if we are involved or not. I know that this story is not applicable in many cases. It's not rational to expect that the University of Oxford would do the same. However, I am sure that this story *is* applicable in many cultures of the similar size, like Serbian is. It is also important that the visibility of Wikimedia organizations all over the world is very important. You could get something very valuable if you show that you are friendly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matica_srpska ___ 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
Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
Perhaps Lane's involvement with RCOM would prevent submissions from going unanswered for months - this is a huge roadblock to researchers who are trying to do things ethically. On the other hand, if Lane were to accuse other researchers of harming the community for personal gain, as he has done off-list in this case, that too would be very problematic, IMO worse than any survey of this type. I would like to thank others for their feedback. Yes, we are aware of NOTAVOTE - the terminology is a bit problematic, but we are trying to get at the unique use of rationales that ideally constitutes the bulk of such non-vote discussions. Message: 2 Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 15:43:48 +0300 From: Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey Message-ID: CACtNa8tHeMQRxjnsGHdHDG5B=BX0BsMe4HwSt0GVWp18= 84...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Good points, Lane. Such things were possibly discussed before, but it's the first time that I see it it spelled out like this. This approach should be advertised a bit somehow, so that the researchers know how to do it ethically and for everybody's benefit, and so that the experienced Wikipedians would know not to start answering such surveys. -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore 2014-07-16 14:39 GMT+03:00 Lane Rasberry l...@bluerasberry.com: Hello, I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board contact me. I asked the researcher about RCOM and other things. This person said they posted to RCOM, but the Meta page states that submissions should receive responses within 1-2 weeks, and yet our messages went unanswered. We have institutional ethics approval, but that doesn't last indefinitely, and so after receiving no response we opted to go ahead. I am not going to share more than this publicly, but in short, I talked with the researcher to the limit of their interest and they feel that they must proceed with the research. Their oversight is at http://www.uwo.ca/research/about/research_offices.html Their RCOM page is at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:The_Use_of_Rationales_in_Wikipedia_Articles_for_Deletion_Discussions_and_in_Group_Decision_Making My concern here, as with many surveys, is that the researcher greatly values their time and assigns less value to Wikipedia community time, and is comfortable asking for lots of volunteer time on the pretense of helping our community. This kind of research is, in my opinion, not helpful to Wikipedians because the questions make no sense due to having been designed by an outsider, and additionally so many people have these same questions and only want to target our most active and busiest and valuable volunteers. Furthermore there is no compliance here with community values in research. Bad surveys create survey fatigue, in which volunteers are later disinclined to participate in good and useful community-approved research. If anyone sees research problems in the future I am interested in talking about these things. I have been thinking of becoming more involved in supporting RCOM for some time. The basic problem is that practically all researchers assume that the number of highly active Wikipedians is huge, and therefore, they imagine no problem for them to ask for any amount of volunteer time to be diverted from Wikipedia to their personal and private collection of survey data. The reality is that there are not more than hundreds or low thousands of Wikipedians who are active to the extent they imagine. This survey is targeting English AfD, where I imagine there are only low hundreds of at most of continually active participants, and the reality may be much lower participation than that. I asked this researcher to discontinue the survey pending a check on the impact of it on the Wikipedia community. I said this because I feel they are out of compliance with even the soft suggestions in research that are available, and they know this. yours, On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 6:53 AM, Srikanth Ramakrishnan srik.r...@wikimedia.in wrote: If the people who have created this survey can fix the problems raised by Fae, I'd be happy to share this with several language Wikipedians in India. I'm sure that at this point nobody would want to be part of it. On Jul 16, 2014 1:54 PM, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: In Polish Wikipedia there is no voting for deletion for around 3-4 years. There is discussion and then final decission is made by one of admins who regularly
Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
On 16 July 2014 12:34, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: I would suggest that it doesn't become not a vote merely by not calling it a vote. I note all the closes that count !votes and how the not-voting pattern on a given AFD is frequently brought up at DRV. Vote-counting is increasingly prevalent in template deletion discussions (TfDs) on en.WP, too. I raised my concerns there, in May: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Templates_for_discussion#Closure_decisions -- 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] On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014
Hoi, WOW Gerard On 16 July 2014 17:31, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote: I am finally able to share with you the biggest benefit of WMRS Microgrants projects for this year. It's about cooperation with one very old institution, and it was necessary to wait for their formal letter. But first about the side effects of the Microgrants project... When you are going outside and tell people that you are willing to support their projects, it could lead into interesting outcomes. It is important to understand possibilities which could be opened and catch them. We got one interesting proposal. It was about a long term project of making photos of one person. The project was very interesting, but it turned out that it's not suitable to be supported by Wikimedia, as well as the amount of needed money is so small, that I am able to fund it personally. However, that was not the end. That guy, an amateur photographer (with professional skills) is actually the top Serbian lector. He proofread the Orthography of Serbian language. He is also a lexicographer, working in Matica srpska [1]. So, we met in my office. While drinking some alcohol, besides his own project, we were talking about the state of Serbian lexicography and culture in general. We were talking about Matica srpska, as well; about present financial state of the institution, which has money for salaries and the most important projects, but doesn't have for a number of projects. I had bold ideas, of course, but I was quite skeptical about rational possibility of cooperation between WMRS and Matica srpska. However, he convinced me that the president of MS is likely willing to cooperate and that we should talk about that. So he told me that he'll arrange the meeting with the president and that we should talk about that. Few weeks later I led WMRS delegation (our ED Mile and our program manager Ivana were in the delegation) to the initial talks with MS. I think we were talking two hours. And I am quite confident to tell you that on June 20th, 2014 happened one historical event, not just for Wikimedia Serbia, but also for Serbian culture and free knowledge. I wasn't able to talk about this till today, when we got formal letter from MS, which summarize our meeting and emphases their commitment to accessibility of knowledge to as much people as it's possible. If you are in Slavic culture in general, you should know what Matica srpska is. As the most of you are not, here is the story in short... MS is the oldest cultural and scientific institution in Serbia. They are the main lexicographical and encyclopedistic institution in Serbia. It isn't easily comparable with large cultures, but, basically, if we don't count independent institutions, 90% of dictionaries and the most important encyclopedias have been created inside of MS or with MS as the leader of the project. We share one important trait with the institutions like MS is. It's about long term goals. We want to start cooperation and develop it. So, we are starting with cooperation slowly. During the next year our goal is to liberate two dictionaries. One is ornithological, the other one covers dialects of Vojvodina. That's just the beginning, of course. Their editions are the main dictionaries of Serbian language and we'll discuss the next year about the steps toward liberating them. They are also in charge for creation of national encyclopedia, but it has its own Board and during the next months we should start talking with the Board, as well. The significance of this cooperation for Wikimedia is that we are at the beginning of the first close relations with one main national cultural institution, which focus is creating dictionaries and encyclopedias. They share our goals, as well as they want to cooperate with us. And it's not just about liberating content because we will help it financially. It's their commitment, as well. They want to share their content on Internet. With our (technological, licensing etc.) help, they will become the institution which shares their content by default, no matter if we are involved or not. I know that this story is not applicable in many cases. It's not rational to expect that the University of Oxford would do the same. However, I am sure that this story *is* applicable in many cultures of the similar size, like Serbian is. It is also important that the visibility of Wikimedia organizations all over the world is very important. You could get something very valuable if you show that you are friendly. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matica_srpska ___ 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] AFD survey
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Lane Rasberry l...@bluerasberry.com wrote: Hello, I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board contact me. I asked the researcher about RCOM and other things. This person said they posted to RCOM, but the Meta page states that submissions should receive responses within 1-2 weeks, and yet our messages went unanswered. We have institutional ethics approval, but that doesn't last indefinitely, and so after receiving no response we opted to go ahead. I am not going to share more than this publicly, but in short, I talked with the researcher to the limit of their interest and they feel that they must proceed with the research. Their oversight is at http://www.uwo.ca/research/about/research_offices.html The survey is voluntary, obviously, and anyone who doesn't wish to participate need not. No one is under any obligation to promote it, and we have no rules barring anyone from posting a notice of such a survey to public mailing lists. The survey may not be well designed (we don't necessarily know the full aim of the research), or well targeted, but I do not see how that makes it unethical. No time or effort is consumed that is not volunteered by anyone who elects to participate. The WMF research committee is not the sole arbiter of who can perform research or analysis of the Wikimedia movement or any individual projects; it merely promises recruiting assistance as the result of approval. The proposal for this survey was submitted to RCOM in January, with evidently no comment or contact from RCOM since. The RCOM page says it has not met since 2011. The process appears to be defunct and no researcher should be required to wait for it to be resurrected. ___ 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] On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014
Looks really nice. Could you send an update, when the files are uploaded? And a blog post would be wonderful :) Best! C. Cornelius Kibelka Twitter: @jaancornelius Mobile:+351-91-9860232 (Vodafone PT) German number currently offline On 16 July 2014 18:02, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, WOW Gerard On 16 July 2014 17:31, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote: I am finally able to share with you the biggest benefit of WMRS Microgrants projects for this year. It's about cooperation with one very old institution, and it was necessary to wait for their formal letter. But first about the side effects of the Microgrants project... When you are going outside and tell people that you are willing to support their projects, it could lead into interesting outcomes. It is important to understand possibilities which could be opened and catch them. We got one interesting proposal. It was about a long term project of making photos of one person. The project was very interesting, but it turned out that it's not suitable to be supported by Wikimedia, as well as the amount of needed money is so small, that I am able to fund it personally. However, that was not the end. That guy, an amateur photographer (with professional skills) is actually the top Serbian lector. He proofread the Orthography of Serbian language. He is also a lexicographer, working in Matica srpska [1]. So, we met in my office. While drinking some alcohol, besides his own project, we were talking about the state of Serbian lexicography and culture in general. We were talking about Matica srpska, as well; about present financial state of the institution, which has money for salaries and the most important projects, but doesn't have for a number of projects. I had bold ideas, of course, but I was quite skeptical about rational possibility of cooperation between WMRS and Matica srpska. However, he convinced me that the president of MS is likely willing to cooperate and that we should talk about that. So he told me that he'll arrange the meeting with the president and that we should talk about that. Few weeks later I led WMRS delegation (our ED Mile and our program manager Ivana were in the delegation) to the initial talks with MS. I think we were talking two hours. And I am quite confident to tell you that on June 20th, 2014 happened one historical event, not just for Wikimedia Serbia, but also for Serbian culture and free knowledge. I wasn't able to talk about this till today, when we got formal letter from MS, which summarize our meeting and emphases their commitment to accessibility of knowledge to as much people as it's possible. If you are in Slavic culture in general, you should know what Matica srpska is. As the most of you are not, here is the story in short... MS is the oldest cultural and scientific institution in Serbia. They are the main lexicographical and encyclopedistic institution in Serbia. It isn't easily comparable with large cultures, but, basically, if we don't count independent institutions, 90% of dictionaries and the most important encyclopedias have been created inside of MS or with MS as the leader of the project. We share one important trait with the institutions like MS is. It's about long term goals. We want to start cooperation and develop it. So, we are starting with cooperation slowly. During the next year our goal is to liberate two dictionaries. One is ornithological, the other one covers dialects of Vojvodina. That's just the beginning, of course. Their editions are the main dictionaries of Serbian language and we'll discuss the next year about the steps toward liberating them. They are also in charge for creation of national encyclopedia, but it has its own Board and during the next months we should start talking with the Board, as well. The significance of this cooperation for Wikimedia is that we are at the beginning of the first close relations with one main national cultural institution, which focus is creating dictionaries and encyclopedias. They share our goals, as well as they want to cooperate with us. And it's not just about liberating content because we will help it financially. It's their commitment, as well. They want to share their content on Internet. With our (technological, licensing etc.) help, they will become the institution which shares their content by default, no matter if we are involved or not. I know that this story is not applicable in many cases. It's not rational to expect that the University of Oxford would do the same. However, I am sure that this story *is* applicable in many cultures of the similar size, like Serbian is. It is also important that the visibility of Wikimedia organizations all over the world is very important. You could get something very valuable if you
Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey
To avoid confusion with researchers in the future, I've made some minor changes to the research related pages on Meta (see below). This should help ensure that outdated documentation does not cause unnecessarily delay and/or expense for those interested in doing Wikimedia-related research. 1: Posted a notice to the top of https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Subject_recruitment to the effect that RCOM no longer evaluates research projects or participates in recruiting participants, and removed the assertion that research requires approval from RCOM. 2: Updated https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:FAQ to make it clear that the WMF / RCOM does not evaluate specific research proposals or assist in recruiting, and that any researcher intending to conduct on-wiki interaction should seek approval from the local projects using whatever methods have been established locally. 3: Removed the reference to RCOM approval from https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Projects ___ 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] Subject for Wikimedia Hackathon(s) 2014-2015: CoSyne
Hi, WMFr is still thinking about organizing Wikimedia Hackathon in 2015. We are currently identifying the technical, financial and especially human resources needed to make it a success. Frans, could you provide me/us your documentation or the link (Meta ?) ? It would be very useful. Wikimedia France really wants to organize an international event in 2015. Anyway, we believe that if another chapter wants to organize Hackathon it could be a waste of time for one of us to position our proposals against until the result. So if a sister entity positions herself clearly and seriously to organize Wikimedia Hackathon we can discuss it. Best regards, -- Emeric Vallespi Vice-Treasurer Wikimedia France emeric.valle...@wikimedia.fr Twitter: @evallespi | Mob. +33 (0)6 61151312 On 14 juil. 2014, at 20:38, Frans Grijzenhout fr...@wikimedia.nl wrote: Hi Balázs, WMNL hosted the international hackaton in 2013. Documentation is archived and thus still available and we are more than willing to help you in preparing the international hackaton in 2015. Regards, Frans *Frans Grijzenhout*, voorzitter / chair fr...@wikimedia.nl +31 6 5333 9499 http://www.wikimedia.nl/ *Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland* *Postadres*: *Bezoekadres:* Postbus 167 Mariaplaats 3 3500 AD Utrecht3511 LH Utrecht ABNAMRO NL33 ABNA 0497164833 - Kamer van Koophandel 17189036 2014-07-14 16:56 GMT+02:00 Balázs Viczián balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.hu: Hi, WMHU would be interested in *hosting *a Hackathon in Hungary (anywhere) but we would need a couple of international volunteers to help filling the core of event (finding topics and speakers or building up the content in general). In exchange, the rest (from side events to the smallest details) can be left with us :) Balazs 2014-07-14 14:53 GMT+02:00 Frans Grijzenhout fr...@wikimedia.nl: Hi Romaine, this is to remind you that the CoSyne project was a research project, sponsored by the EU and conducted by different partners. The research has been concluded and the results have been reported early 2013..The technical infrastructure has sinds then been dismantled, so it will not be that easy to restart CoSyne. Regards, Frans *Frans Grijzenhout*, voorzitter / chair fr...@wikimedia.nl +31 6 5333 9499 http://www.wikimedia.nl/ *Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland* *Postadres*: *Bezoekadres:* Postbus 167 Mariaplaats 3 3500 AD Utrecht3511 LH Utrecht ABNAMRO NL33 ABNA 0497164833 - Kamer van Koophandel 17189036 2014-07-09 23:44 GMT+02:00 Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com: I doubt if these tools are similar. But I do think they can benefit from each other. Romaine 2014-07-09 16:03 GMT+02:00 Antoine Musso hashar+...@free.fr: Le 09/07/2014 14:33, Romaine Wiki a écrit : As a subject of one/more hackathons I would like to recommend CoSyne [1]. CoSyne is translation and multilingual synchronisation tool. The project was set up by Wikimedia Netherlands together with several universities and other partners, including the EU. The tool makes it possible to translate much more easier from one Wikipedia (etc) to another with much better quality translations than existing translating tools. It does not matter if an article is already written, it is possible with this tool to expand existing articles and to update articles with a new section when on one Wikipedia this was added. It makes it possible to exchange information in more languages and helps users to keep the articles up-to-date. I have tested the Bèta version of this tool and these tests were very successful. [1] https://nl.wikimedia.org/wiki/CoSyne Romaine Hello, Seems it is very similiar to the content translation Wikimedia i18n team is working on: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Content_translation Demo video: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/File:CX_Section_Alignment_Preview_and_Basic_Editing.webm -- Antoine hashar Musso ___ 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 ___ 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,
[Wikimedia-l] Research Committee
Hi - copying this under a new subject that makes the topic more clear to anyone skimming their inbox. Beyond the edits made below to clarify the current practice, I was curious about the success and value of the RCOM in general. First, I'm not aware of how active the committee was in the past in reviewing proposals, and it's certainly possible a great deal of work was done in this area. But reading the charter for the committee and looking around meta for related documentation, it appears that almost none of the elements of the charter have been accomplished. Despite this, in an e-mail last year to the RCOM list, Dario suggested that the continued operation of a membership committee was no longer a priority. (Nor has it been for some time - the last documented meeting was in 2011, the IRC channel has been mothballed, and the last monthly report [issued in 2012] is no longer even available). I gather that individually the members of the committee have created research-related initiatives that are valuable, and that part of the impetus for this work may have been collaboration through the vehicle of the committee. However, the charter lays out some pretty worthwhile goals: policies for conflicts of interest, guidelines for recruiting subjects, a process for requesting non-public data, supporting research projects with technical resources, creating an open-access policy, releasing a starter kit for researchers, etc. At least from the links within the orbit of the main RCOM page, it's not clear to me that any of these goals have been achieved or even that substantial progress has been made. If it has, then the RCOM is definitely selling itself short by not making that more public. If indeed these are all still outstanding goals, it's disappointing that the committee is basically wound up without any hope or plan or achieving them. On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 3:53 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote: To avoid confusion with researchers in the future, I've made some minor changes to the research related pages on Meta (see below). This should help ensure that outdated documentation does not cause unnecessarily delay and/or expense for those interested in doing Wikimedia-related research. 1: Posted a notice to the top of https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Subject_recruitment to the effect that RCOM no longer evaluates research projects or participates in recruiting participants, and removed the assertion that research requires approval from RCOM. 2: Updated https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:FAQ to make it clear that the WMF / RCOM does not evaluate specific research proposals or assist in recruiting, and that any researcher intending to conduct on-wiki interaction should seek approval from the local projects using whatever methods have been established locally. 3: Removed the reference to RCOM approval from https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Projects ___ 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] On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014
Congratulations to all involved, this is quite an auspicious start to a project with a really remarkable amount of promise. Best, Kevin Gorman On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 11:20 AM, Cornelius Kibelka jckibe...@gmail.com wrote: Looks really nice. Could you send an update, when the files are uploaded? And a blog post would be wonderful :) Best! C. Cornelius Kibelka Twitter: @jaancornelius Mobile:+351-91-9860232 (Vodafone PT) German number currently offline On 16 July 2014 18:02, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, WOW Gerard On 16 July 2014 17:31, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote: I am finally able to share with you the biggest benefit of WMRS Microgrants projects for this year. It's about cooperation with one very old institution, and it was necessary to wait for their formal letter. But first about the side effects of the Microgrants project... When you are going outside and tell people that you are willing to support their projects, it could lead into interesting outcomes. It is important to understand possibilities which could be opened and catch them. We got one interesting proposal. It was about a long term project of making photos of one person. The project was very interesting, but it turned out that it's not suitable to be supported by Wikimedia, as well as the amount of needed money is so small, that I am able to fund it personally. However, that was not the end. That guy, an amateur photographer (with professional skills) is actually the top Serbian lector. He proofread the Orthography of Serbian language. He is also a lexicographer, working in Matica srpska [1]. So, we met in my office. While drinking some alcohol, besides his own project, we were talking about the state of Serbian lexicography and culture in general. We were talking about Matica srpska, as well; about present financial state of the institution, which has money for salaries and the most important projects, but doesn't have for a number of projects. I had bold ideas, of course, but I was quite skeptical about rational possibility of cooperation between WMRS and Matica srpska. However, he convinced me that the president of MS is likely willing to cooperate and that we should talk about that. So he told me that he'll arrange the meeting with the president and that we should talk about that. Few weeks later I led WMRS delegation (our ED Mile and our program manager Ivana were in the delegation) to the initial talks with MS. I think we were talking two hours. And I am quite confident to tell you that on June 20th, 2014 happened one historical event, not just for Wikimedia Serbia, but also for Serbian culture and free knowledge. I wasn't able to talk about this till today, when we got formal letter from MS, which summarize our meeting and emphases their commitment to accessibility of knowledge to as much people as it's possible. If you are in Slavic culture in general, you should know what Matica srpska is. As the most of you are not, here is the story in short... MS is the oldest cultural and scientific institution in Serbia. They are the main lexicographical and encyclopedistic institution in Serbia. It isn't easily comparable with large cultures, but, basically, if we don't count independent institutions, 90% of dictionaries and the most important encyclopedias have been created inside of MS or with MS as the leader of the project. We share one important trait with the institutions like MS is. It's about long term goals. We want to start cooperation and develop it. So, we are starting with cooperation slowly. During the next year our goal is to liberate two dictionaries. One is ornithological, the other one covers dialects of Vojvodina. That's just the beginning, of course. Their editions are the main dictionaries of Serbian language and we'll discuss the next year about the steps toward liberating them. They are also in charge for creation of national encyclopedia, but it has its own Board and during the next months we should start talking with the Board, as well. The significance of this cooperation for Wikimedia is that we are at the beginning of the first close relations with one main national cultural institution, which focus is creating dictionaries and encyclopedias. They share our goals, as well as they want to cooperate with us. And it's not just about liberating content because we will help it financially. It's their commitment, as well. They want to share their content on Internet. With our (technological, licensing etc.) help, they will become the institution which shares their content by default, no matter if we are involved or not. I know that this story is not applicable in many cases. It's not rational
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Research Committee
And... unsurprisingly, Aaron has reverted the changes I referred to above. Not with any explanation, of course, other than not true. Looking at the list of reviewed projects (where the review appears to constitute a small handful of questions on the talkpage), the RCOM has reviewed a total of 10 projects in its history. I'm excluding the one where Aaron himself is a co-investigator. That might sound like a substantial amount, but in 2013 and 2014 the rate so far is 1 (one) per *year*. Meanwhile, the AfD request languished for 7 months without a peep from Aaron or someone on RCOM. Since we're on the subject, let's look at the research index and see what we can see. # There is a Gender Inequality Index that has no comments from RCOM, posted a month ago. # We have Modeling monthly active editors submitted by Aaron himself. This is worth looking at[1] as evidently an example of what an RCOM member considers sufficient description of a research project. Specifically, nothing at all. # Number of books read by WikiWriters a page written by a high school student that should have been deleted but hasn't been, suggesting the submissions may not be closely monitored... # Use of Wikipedia by doctors submitted both to RCOM and to IEG in March, no comment by RCOM. # Chinese Wikivoyage, created in January, no comment by RCOM. # SSAJRP program - extensively documented, posted in October 2013, no comment from RCOM and no RCOM liaison. This research is ongoing. # Gender assymetry, posted in September 2013, no comment from RCOM. # Dynamics of inclusion and exclusion, August 2013, no comment or participation from RCOM. I'm sure the list could go on, because the pattern is perfect - virtually the only projects to get participation from either Dario or Aaron are those managed by WMF staff members (and most often, Aaron himself is the investigator). But the inactivity of RCOM is not news to the WMF. In December of last year, Dario posted to rcom-l [2] that The Research Committee as a group with a fixed membership and a regular meeting schedule has been inactive for a very long time. He then stated that ...the existence of a fixed-membership group with a recognized authority on any possible matter related to Wikimedia research and associated policies has ceased to be a priority. Another member of RCOM, WMF employee Jonathan Morgan, said in June on meta I'm not sure what RCOM's mandate is these days. When asked in March how many projects RCOM had actually approved, it took Aaron four months to reply.[3] So it is factually incorrect to suggest in documentation that RCOM approval is required for anything; it's clear that RCOM as a body does not actually exist. It may be argued that the approval of one of the two involved WMF employees is required. If that's the case, then at least based on public evidence they have been doing an absolutely woeful job of keeping up with this labor. I'll admit it's possible that all of the communication has been via e-mail, and in actuality Aaron and Dario have been very busy providing feedback to non-WMF researchers. If that's the case, or of I'm missing some other function that RCOM fulfills, I'd love to hear about it. Otherwise it appears that RCOM is primarily an obstacle to prevent non-WMF researchers from conducting research, a strange policy indeed. [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Modeling_monthly_active_editors [2] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/rcom-l/2013-December/000600.html [3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Research_talk%3ASubject_recruitmentdiff=9220467oldid=9220082 ___ 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] Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 124, Issue 54
The mother bless us , my all Dearer , as you know , all is well , but everyone can not feel as all , so please change your feeling and expresion . Thanks , +91-9307788333 wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote: Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org You can reach the person managing the list at wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest... Today's Topics: 1. Re: AFD survey (Fæ) 2. Re: AFD survey (Amir E. Aharoni) 3. Re: AFD survey (Marc A. Pelletier) 4. Re: Lsjbot i Wall street jpournal and BBC world (Ilario Valdelli) 5. On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014 (Milos Rancic) 6. Re: On historical event / WMRS Microgrants 2014 (Jon Davies) -- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 13:02:30 +0100 From: Fæ fae...@gmail.com To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey Message-ID: CAH7nnD3ddsG4HK-w85j+J=nU5zDEBXR-iEE=hal86wdxhha...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 16 July 2014 12:39, Lane Rasberry l...@bluerasberry.com wrote: ... I asked this researcher to discontinue the survey pending a check on the impact of it on the Wikipedia community. I said this because I feel they are out of compliance with even the soft suggestions in research that are available, and they know this. Good point. If anyone wanted to research deletion discussion patterns and outcomes on the English Wikipedia or other projects, I could knock out a nice analysis using a little passive but intelligent bot work depending on their requirements. I'm easy to find. I'm pretty sure this would be a lot cheaper in volunteer time or research time than creating surveys to answer very similar questions, particularly if the resulting report were freely published so that volunteers could give their subjective value responses to that instead. Fae -- fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae -- Message: 2 Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 15:43:48 +0300 From: Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] AFD survey Message-ID: CACtNa8tHeMQRxjnsGHdHDG5B=BX0BsMe4HwSt0GVWp18=84...@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Good points, Lane. Such things were possibly discussed before, but it's the first time that I see it it spelled out like this. This approach should be advertised a bit somehow, so that the researchers know how to do it ethically and for everybody's benefit, and so that the experienced Wikipedians would know not to start answering such surveys. -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore 2014-07-16 14:39 GMT+03:00 Lane Rasberry l...@bluerasberry.com: Hello, I feel that this is an unethical research project and I have told the researcher so. We exchanged several emails and were unable to understand each other. I asked them to please have their university ethics board contact me. I asked the researcher about RCOM and other things. This person said they posted to RCOM, but the Meta page states that submissions should receive responses within 1-2 weeks, and yet our messages went unanswered. We have institutional ethics approval, but that doesn't last indefinitely, and so after receiving no response we opted to go ahead. I am not going to share more than ___ 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
