Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quarterly reviews of high priority WMF initiatives

[Tilman Bayer]

Minutes and slides from Monday's quarterly review meeting of the
Foundation's Grantmaking department are now available at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WMF_Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Grantmaking/September_2014
.

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Erik Moeller  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, 

[Wikimedia-l] product roadmap

[James Salsman]

Re the request for discussion about the product roadmap during the
metrics meeting at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJGC9zpbJpU&t=1h06m30s

Do Foundation officials intend to address supporting article accuracy review?

I have asked several specific questions about
https://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposal:Develop_systems_for_accuracy_review
and I am certain that the proposal or something very similar is
urgently needed for the transition from content creation to content
maintenance on the largest projects. However at present there have
been no response. Does the Foundation have an alternative contingency
plan for article updating if active editors continue to decline? Or
are all the eggs being put into the basket of hoping that someone
thinks of something to reverse active editor decline, after at least a
dozen such attempts have yielded zero results over the past half
decade?

___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] First Wikipedia Article has been Formally Peer Reviewed and Published

[Pete Forsyth]

On Oct 4, 2014 1:30 PM, "Ziko van Dijk"  wrote:
>
I hope that
> someone will do something with our etherpad notes.
>

Link?
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] First Wikipedia Article has been Formally Peer Reviewed and Published

[Ziko van Dijk]

Dear friends,

at the WikiCon 2014 in Cologne (the Wikimania for the German speaking
countries) we discussed similar issues, together with some external people.
Can one quote from WP, under what circumstances, and why not. I hope that
someone will do something with our etherpad notes.

A panel discussion yesterday evening. There was one gentleman from a major
German publishing house (C.H. Beck; google about the related plagiarism
scandal) who said that he was astonished that WP authors often talk so
negativly about the quotability and quality of the articles. And one
student in the audience said: "I am new here, I'am just a reader. If I
understand you well, you guys here think that one should not quote from WP?
(People saying: Yes, one should'nt!) Okay, I did not know that, and I
believe that many people don't know that."

Kind regards
Ziko


Am Samstag, 4. Oktober 2014 schrieb James Heilman :

> I agree all Wikipedia articles are sort of peer reviewed. When I speak
> about GA/FA I refer to it as Wikipedia's semi-formal peer review process.
>
> With respect to authorship, the 5th to 10th contributors by number of
> editors were contacted and asked if they wished to be listed as an author.
> All of them declined feeling that they had not contributed sufficiently to
> justify being listed.
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> 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,
>  ?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] [Wikimedia Announcements] The Signpost -- Volume 10, Issue 38 -- 01 October 2014

[Wikipedia Signpost]

From the editor: The ''Signpost'' needs your help
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-10-01/From_the_editor

News and notes: Wikipedia article published in peer-reviewed journal; Wikipedia 
in education
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-10-01/News_and_notes

Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-10-01/Dispatches

Featured content: Brothers at War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-10-01/Featured_content

Traffic report: Shanah Tovah
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-10-01/Traffic_report

WikiProject report: Animals, farms, forests, USDA? It must be WikiProject 
Agriculture
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-10-01/WikiProject_report


Single page view
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Signpost/Single

PDF version
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book:Wikipedia_Signpost/2014-10-01


https://www.facebook.com/wikisignpost / https://twitter.com/wikisignpost
--
Wikipedia Signpost Staff
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost

___
Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed 
to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more 
information about Wikimedia-l:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
___
WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] translation by importing articles

[Mark]

On 10/4/14, 4:33 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:

Are there are Wikipedia projects that do this?


No, only German projects.
The list of projects which make special use of import is at 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Importer


I just did some spot-checking, and there are edits of mine from en that 
have been imported to at least el and fr, in addition to de. So at least 
in the past it's been used more widely.


-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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] translation by importing articles

[Leigh Thelmadatter]

this is cool, I can easily see that at least some of my articles are being 
translated to German!

> Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 16:33:52 +0200
> From: nemow...@gmail.com
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] translation by importing articles
> 
> Amir E. Aharoni, 04/10/2014 15:09:
> >
> > Is it a usual practice in the German Wikipedia?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > What is the reason for it?
> 
> GFDL
> 
> > Is there a policy page about it?
> 
> Probably in the neighbourhood of 
> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Importw%C3%BCnsche
> 
> > Are there are Wikipedia projects that do this?
> 
> No, only German projects.
> The list of projects which make special use of import is at 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Importer
> 
> 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, 
> 
  
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] translation by importing articles

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Amir E. Aharoni, 04/10/2014 15:09:


Is it a usual practice in the German Wikipedia?


Yes.


What is the reason for it?


GFDL


Is there a policy page about it?


Probably in the neighbourhood of 
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Importw%C3%BCnsche



Are there are Wikipedia projects that do this?


No, only German projects.
The list of projects which make special use of import is at 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Importer


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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] First Wikipedia Article has been Formally Peer Reviewed and Published

[Todd Allen]

This is indeed an accomplishment. Well due congratulations to all involved.

On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 7:47 AM, James Heilman  wrote:

> I agree all Wikipedia articles are sort of peer reviewed. When I speak
> about GA/FA I refer to it as Wikipedia's semi-formal peer review process.
>
> With respect to authorship, the 5th to 10th contributors by number of
> editors were contacted and asked if they wished to be listed as an author.
> All of them declined feeling that they had not contributed sufficiently to
> justify being listed.
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> 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 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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising reports after 2011

[rupert THURNER]

that would be indeed valuable information.

rupert


On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
 wrote:
> Since 2012 it's almost impossible to get information about the WMF
> fundraising... Does someone have insight in how WMF could be made again
> interested in fundraising transparency? Poking doesn't help.
>
> For instance: me, Perohanych and Mike Peel have been waiting 16 months for
> two simple and crucial pieces of information: how many times the fundraising
> banners have been displayed; what are the totals raised per country.
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising_2012/Report
>
> 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,
> 

___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] First Wikipedia Article has been Formally Peer Reviewed and Published

[James Heilman]

I agree all Wikipedia articles are sort of peer reviewed. When I speak
about GA/FA I refer to it as Wikipedia's semi-formal peer review process.

With respect to authorship, the 5th to 10th contributors by number of
editors were contacted and asked if they wished to be listed as an author.
All of them declined feeling that they had not contributed sufficiently to
justify being listed.

-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] translation by importing articles

[Amir E. Aharoni]

I understand that importing shows edits with the same username as if they
were done in the target wiki.

My question is different:
1. Is it the usual practice for the German Wikipedia to do an import when
translation is done? If yes, why?
2. Are there other wikis that do an import when translation is done?


--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬

2014-10-04 16:38 GMT+03:00 Romaine Wiki :

> > Is it a usual practice in the German Wikipedia? What is the reason for
> it?
> > Is there a policy page about it?
> > Are there are Wikipedia projects that do this?
>
> This is because the import function works this way. I think it would be
> better if imported revisions are marked as with origin from another
> Wikipedia.
> That it works this way is on all wikis which import pages.
>
> Romaine
>
>
>
> 2014-10-04 15:09 GMT+02:00 Amir E. Aharoni :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I looked at my contribution in the German Wikipedia[1] and noticed some
> > unusual things:
> > * I have many more contributions there than I thought I do.
> > * I did some very strange edits, such as adding a category with an
> > *English* name[2]
> >
> > "Why would I do such a thing?", I thought.
> >
> > Then I realized that some articles in the German Wikipedia are imported
> > with all their old versions when they are being translated. So these
> edits
> > were actually in the English Wikipedia.
> >
> > Is it a usual practice in the German Wikipedia? What is the reason for
> it?
> > Is there a policy page about it?
> > Are there are Wikipedia projects that do this?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Amire80
> > [2]
> >
> >
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jasmine_%28JavaScript%29&diff=prev&oldid=126861042
> >
> > --
> > Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> > http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> > ‪“We're living in pieces,
> > I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> > ___
> > 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 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 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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] translation by importing articles

[Romaine Wiki]

> Is it a usual practice in the German Wikipedia? What is the reason for it?
> Is there a policy page about it?
> Are there are Wikipedia projects that do this?

This is because the import function works this way. I think it would be
better if imported revisions are marked as with origin from another
Wikipedia.
That it works this way is on all wikis which import pages.

Romaine



2014-10-04 15:09 GMT+02:00 Amir E. Aharoni :

> Hi,
>
> I looked at my contribution in the German Wikipedia[1] and noticed some
> unusual things:
> * I have many more contributions there than I thought I do.
> * I did some very strange edits, such as adding a category with an
> *English* name[2]
>
> "Why would I do such a thing?", I thought.
>
> Then I realized that some articles in the German Wikipedia are imported
> with all their old versions when they are being translated. So these edits
> were actually in the English Wikipedia.
>
> Is it a usual practice in the German Wikipedia? What is the reason for it?
> Is there a policy page about it?
> Are there are Wikipedia projects that do this?
>
> Thanks!
>
> [1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Amire80
> [2]
>
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jasmine_%28JavaScript%29&diff=prev&oldid=126861042
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> 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 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] translation by importing articles

[Amir E. Aharoni]

Hi,

I looked at my contribution in the German Wikipedia[1] and noticed some
unusual things:
* I have many more contributions there than I thought I do.
* I did some very strange edits, such as adding a category with an
*English* name[2]

"Why would I do such a thing?", I thought.

Then I realized that some articles in the German Wikipedia are imported
with all their old versions when they are being translated. So these edits
were actually in the English Wikipedia.

Is it a usual practice in the German Wikipedia? What is the reason for it?
Is there a policy page about it?
Are there are Wikipedia projects that do this?

Thanks!

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spezial:Beitr%C3%A4ge/Amire80
[2]
https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jasmine_%28JavaScript%29&diff=prev&oldid=126861042

--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
‪“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
___
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, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] First Wikipedia Article has been Formally Peer Reviewed and Published

[Erlend Bjørtvedt]

Yeah, this is really  a great thing!
Just remember not to communicate, in a way, that "at last, we have a peer
reviewed Wikipedia article!"..
.
I have myself had twho scientific articles peer reviewed for Scientific
periodicals, and know very well that this is quite a process.

But then we also have the kind of articles that have not been formally peer
reviewed in that sense, but are still Wikipedia-peer reviewed and of
extraordinary standard.

In 2010, PhD / psychiatrist Øystein Eiring wrote a large number of medical
articles to Norwegian Wikipedia.

One example is the entry on Schizofrenia

http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizofreni

It was started by many writers, including doctors "Reodor" and "Sigve",
both physicians. With Dr Eiring the article (and many others) got a serious
Scientific boost and has 217 References. It has had 156 different
contributors, and the Three mentioned doctors have both changed each
others' contributors and had their own wordings changed. As much as 3,5 KB
of doctor "Sigve"'s text, has been removed or changed.

This is the wonderful beauty of Wikipedia peer review!


Best regards
Erlend Bjørtvedt


2014-10-04 8:52 GMT+02:00 Nurunnaby Hasive :

> Great work James! Congratulation.
>
> On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 12:42 PM, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > Not really
> > P
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Erlend Bjørtvedt
> > Sent: 03 October 2014 09:57 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] First Wikipedia Article has been Formally Peer
> > Reviewed and Published
> >
> > But remember: all Wikipedia articles are peer reviewed..
> >
> > Erlend Bjørtvedt
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Den fredag 3. oktober 2014 skrev Vishnu  følgende:
> >
> > > Congratulations!
> > >
> > > A great model that could be emulated by many of us across other
> > > disciplines too.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Vishnu
> > >
> > >
> > > On Friday 03 October 2014 04:54 AM, James Heilman wrote:
> > >
> > >> Article published by the journal Open Medicine
> > >> http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/viewFile/562/564
> > >>
> > >> Will soon be pubmed indexed. Editorial regarding the efforts are here
> > >> http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/view/652/565
> > >>
> > >> Hope these sorts of efforts will improve the reputation of Wikipedia
> > >> and the number of contributors. I guess we will see.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Erlend Bjørtvedt*
> > Nestleder, Wikimedia Norge
> > Vice chairman, Wikimedia Norway
> > Mob: +47 - 9225 9227
> >  http://no.wikimedia.org 
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
> > -
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2014.0.4765 / Virus Database: 4037/8318 - Release Date: 10/03/14
> >
> >
> > ___
> > 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,
> > 
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive*
> Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia
> 
> Member | IEG Committee, Wikimedia Foundation
> 
> Social Media Interaction Moderator | The Daily Prothom-Alo
> 
> Bangladesh Ambassador | Open Knowledge Foundation Network
> 
> Treasurer | Bangladesh Open Source Network (BdOSN) 
> Task Force Member | Mozilla Bangladesh 
> fb.com/nhasive | @nhasive  | Skype:
> nhasive
> | www.nhasive.com
> ___
> 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,
> 
>



-- 
*Erlend Bjørtvedt*
Nestleder, Wikimedia Norge
Vice chairman, Wikimedia Norway
Mob: +47 - 9225 9227

[Wikimedia-l] Fundraising reports after 2011

[Federico Leva (Nemo)]

Since 2012 it's almost impossible to get information about the WMF 
fundraising... Does someone have insight in how WMF could be made again 
interested in fundraising transparency? Poking doesn't help.


For instance: me, Perohanych and Mike Peel have been waiting 16 months 
for two simple and crucial pieces of information: how many times the 
fundraising banners have been displayed; what are the totals raised per 
country.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fundraising_2012/Report

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,