Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who are the nicest people on our projects ?
Re:https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Faebot/thanks I am glad the tables are useful, hopefully stimulating more positive use of the thanks notifier by contributors. The reports are updating *slowly*, currently at April 2014... This is in part because of the WMFlabs outage yesterday, though in general any report of the logging table is going to be slow (it is the largest table on the wiki database). The first run-through will take several days as it is going back through all of 2014. Once it is only reporting on the previous month, I suspect it will finish monthly updates within the first first day. OPT-OUT There was an interesting debate about the report for the German Wikipedia,[1] with some users feeling it was intrusive or may introduce competitive use of thanks that could be negative. I suspect that many users of the thanks notifier may have been under the impression that the logs were not visible or public. I did not expect this to be contentious, so I am pleased that the extra cautious approach of only adding projects on request, means that I had time to add a global opt-out as a courtesy for individual users that contact me. I have decided to not report on the German Wikipedia thanks log unless there is a consensus from that community that they want to have it. :-) Links: 1. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:Kurier#Danke-Bot_listet_Top_Ten Cheers, Fae On 25 February 2015 at 13:30, Rodrigo Padula rodrigopad...@gmail.com wrote: Excellent!! Great initiative, congratulations! Thank you for answering my request for inclusion of pt.wikipedia! Best regards Rodrigo Padula 2015-02-23 12:57 GMT-03:00, Fæ fae...@gmail.com: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Faebot/thanks I have now set up a monthly report of the top 10 thankers / thankees with an index to the different project reports on the above link. These have been generated retrospectively for 2014 and I will shortly set this up on WMF labs to run at the beginning of each month to add last month's results.* Rather than running this automatically for several hundred projects, I am happy to add projects on request (so long as the thanks extension is being regularly used by more than 10 people!). Just drop a note on my meta talk page to request the addition. I have haphazardly picked 6 of the busiest projects to get started on, mainly as a multi-language test, not because I favour one language Wikipedia over another. :-) Time for someone to create a thank you barnstar of super thanks ? This is one of many ad-hoc reports run as Faebot, but if it becomes especially useful or critical to outreach projects I'll consider moving a stable version to a special bot account or similar. * - At the time of writing, the tables for 2014 are being generated. This may take the rest of the day to complete! If your project has recently been added, the reports might have to wait for the next monthly run depending on how much free wiki-time I have. 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 ___ 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] Who are the nicest people on our projects ?
Excellent!! Great initiative, congratulations! Thank you for answering my request for inclusion of pt.wikipedia! Best regards Rodrigo Padula 2015-02-23 12:57 GMT-03:00, Fæ fae...@gmail.com: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Faebot/thanks I have now set up a monthly report of the top 10 thankers / thankees with an index to the different project reports on the above link. These have been generated retrospectively for 2014 and I will shortly set this up on WMF labs to run at the beginning of each month to add last month's results.* Rather than running this automatically for several hundred projects, I am happy to add projects on request (so long as the thanks extension is being regularly used by more than 10 people!). Just drop a note on my meta talk page to request the addition. I have haphazardly picked 6 of the busiest projects to get started on, mainly as a multi-language test, not because I favour one language Wikipedia over another. :-) Time for someone to create a thank you barnstar of super thanks ? This is one of many ad-hoc reports run as Faebot, but if it becomes especially useful or critical to outreach projects I'll consider moving a stable version to a special bot account or similar. * - At the time of writing, the tables for 2014 are being generated. This may take the rest of the day to complete! If your project has recently been added, the reports might have to wait for the next monthly run depending on how much free wiki-time I have. 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 ___ 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] [Wikimediameta-l] An alternative model for grant funding
On 15-02-25 09:37 AM, Edward Saperia wrote: if they hit their fundraising target [...] Your idea is provocative, and intriguing, but I think that - at least in this form - it is doomed to fail because it actually steps around what makes kickstarter-like crowdfunding work. (a) people put forth their own money, and therefore assume the element of risk themselves. (b) people who participate in crowdfunding do so with highly variable amounts - from a few dollars to several thousands - according to how much interest they have, and that's an important dynamic of the funding process. (c) many (most?) of the people who contribute to campaigns of this nature do so for the perks, or contribute /more/ to the funding because of the perks. Nevertheless, the idea of having the communities themselves fund some of the projects is intriguing. I'm just unconvinced the crowdsourcing model is the one to gun for. -- 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] [Wikimediameta-l] An alternative model for grant funding
This reminds me of a slightly heretical idea I had a while ago while thinking about crowdfunding and WMF fundraising... Currently the WMF raises money via site banners, and spends these on programmes and disburses them via grants, which go to all kinds of projects - education, outreach, development, Wikimedians in Residence, etc etc. Despite the relative openness of the WMF as an organisation, this is still a very centralised, top down method of handling (the disbursement of) these funds. If we're truly going down the everything open, everything community driven route, the more consistent approach would be something like the following: The community submit funding proposals for projects they want to do, of any kind. Each has a campaign page with a description of the project (much like a kickstarter page, with project milestones, background, team etc), a monetary target they're trying to raise, and a banner design. These projects compete for advertising time on the site banner via a community curated queue; When they're at the top of this queue, they're displayed on the banners, which lead to their project pages; if they hit their fundraising target, they're taken down; if they have a low conversion rate (% of views that lead to donations), they're demoted down the queue and, if persistently low, rejected entirely. The criteria for prioritisation of projects in the queue and the vetting of project quality is done organically by the community, who would create and evolve guidelines and policies. The actual handling of the queue could be done algorithmically via an openly editable algorithm, or even done manually like with e.g. WP:ITN - you'd just need a widget that tells you how much a given project has raised so far and what the conversion rate is. If the community is concerned about people being shown too many banners, we dial down the number of people being shown banners, or raise the bar in terms of acceptable conversion rates. If a project raises money and is ultimately considered a failure, then hopefully the community will learn from this and provide more support / be more careful with that kind of project in the future. However, one hopes that this will also allow for bolder project ideas to get off the ground, and also allow for a much larger amount of small funding to go to many small projects, as there is no centralised grants body that has to process them all. In order to pay for its own programmes, then, the WMF itself would have to submit projects into this queue. Nobody would have to go to any centralised body for money - all funds would be raised and disbursed via this one channel. Operationally I suppose the WMF would provide the infrastructure to actually receive and send out the money. You could even start getting clever with e.g. showing different campaigns to readers from different geographical regions, or particular campaigns to readers looking at articles from particular wikipedia categories, and I imagine that kind of thing would start to evolve on its own. It really struck me that the discussions around the centralnotice fundraising banners fell into a classic pattern; one centralised team doing their best, but being overwhelmed by feedback from a large community. This model puts all this attention to good use. *Edward Saperia* Conference Director for Wikimania 2014 http://www.wikimanialondon.org email edsape...@gmail.com • facebook http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia • twitter http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia • 07796955572 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG On 24 February 2015 at 18:54, Sage Ross ragesoss+wikipe...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 10:43 AM, Austin Hair adh...@gmail.com wrote: With more and more Wikimedians engaging in crowdfunding, I suppose we can talk about whether the mailing list for Wikimedia movement organization is the place to advertise in this way. For my part, I don't think a simple (i.e., without any additional context) please check out this Indiegogo is any different from hey, check out my blog, so when the last one came through the queue I rejected it without much thought. It certainly wasn't done with any prejudice. For my part, I always like to see crowdfunding pitches from Wikimedians. There haven't been *that* many of them (maybe 8 or 10?), and so far they've all (that I've seen) come from prolific contributors. These crowdfunding pitches generally take a lot more effort to put together than a blog post does, and they are also easy and satisfying to act on. If I can take 3 minutes and a few dollars to simultaneously say thanks to a great contributor and help them make even better contributions, I'm grateful for that opportunity. -Sage ___ 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] [Wikimediameta-l] An alternative model for grant funding
I'm pretty concerned that the systematic biases in the wikimedia movement would be continued if there was no organized effort to do a comprehensive review of all proposals to see where we are lacking diversity. I'm in favor of having more focused funding calls like the Inspire Gender Gap campaign. A large part of the work of the community grant committees..IEG, PEG, FDC...is evaluating the feasibility of the projects, the impact of work, and giving feedback. This work needs the assistance of paid staff to make sure all the information needed to make decision is available. Then volunteers to look at the information and give a recommendation. I'm not clear on how the work flow you suggest would get the important aspects of the work accomplished. I'm not opposed to a group outside of WMF taking over this type of work. But there was a huge vacuum in the movement around Learning and Evaluation until recently. The WMF began doing this work for lack of anyone else doing it well. At this point, I can't see an independent organization being feasible. Instead of small Project and Event Grants, micro grants, or travel grants, many organizations are asking for unrestricted funds to pay for staff, offices, equipment, specialized staff for software development. They want to have funds to make long term plans with GLAM partner organizations. The evaluation of these large grant requests is extremely time consuming. Our current method of asking a group of volunteers to be available to this type of work a set period of time, and having it also open for other community comment seems to the best approach to make sure every project get a fair look. Today there are dozens of ideas for projects on meta waiting for people to comment and offer assistance of some type. I'm in favor of doing more to encourage members of the wikimedia movement to come to meta and join in working on them. IdeaLab. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Ideas Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Edward Saperia edsape...@gmail.com wrote: This reminds me of a slightly heretical idea I had a while ago while thinking about crowdfunding and WMF fundraising... Currently the WMF raises money via site banners, and spends these on programmes and disburses them via grants, which go to all kinds of projects - education, outreach, development, Wikimedians in Residence, etc etc. Despite the relative openness of the WMF as an organisation, this is still a very centralised, top down method of handling (the disbursement of) these funds. If we're truly going down the everything open, everything community driven route, the more consistent approach would be something like the following: The community submit funding proposals for projects they want to do, of any kind. Each has a campaign page with a description of the project (much like a kickstarter page, with project milestones, background, team etc), a monetary target they're trying to raise, and a banner design. These projects compete for advertising time on the site banner via a community curated queue; When they're at the top of this queue, they're displayed on the banners, which lead to their project pages; if they hit their fundraising target, they're taken down; if they have a low conversion rate (% of views that lead to donations), they're demoted down the queue and, if persistently low, rejected entirely. The criteria for prioritisation of projects in the queue and the vetting of project quality is done organically by the community, who would create and evolve guidelines and policies. The actual handling of the queue could be done algorithmically via an openly editable algorithm, or even done manually like with e.g. WP:ITN - you'd just need a widget that tells you how much a given project has raised so far and what the conversion rate is. If the community is concerned about people being shown too many banners, we dial down the number of people being shown banners, or raise the bar in terms of acceptable conversion rates. If a project raises money and is ultimately considered a failure, then hopefully the community will learn from this and provide more support / be more careful with that kind of project in the future. However, one hopes that this will also allow for bolder project ideas to get off the ground, and also allow for a much larger amount of small funding to go to many small projects, as there is no centralised grants body that has to process them all. In order to pay for its own programmes, then, the WMF itself would have to submit projects into this queue. Nobody would have to go to any centralised body for money - all funds would be raised and disbursed via this one channel. Operationally I suppose the WMF would provide the infrastructure to actually receive and send out the money. You could even start getting clever with e.g. showing different campaigns to
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimediameta-l] An alternative model for grant funding
Of course you're very correct that there are many projects sitting around asking for scrutiny - the difference here is the (potential of) funding would be default yes instead of default no, with the discussion just around the priority. I expect that would attract a lot more attention very quickly indeed. *Edward Saperia* email edsape...@gmail.com • facebook http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia • twitter http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia • 07796955572 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG On 25 February 2015 at 15:38, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pretty concerned that the systematic biases in the wikimedia movement would be continued if there was no organized effort to do a comprehensive review of all proposals to see where we are lacking diversity. I'm in favor of having more focused funding calls like the Inspire Gender Gap campaign. A large part of the work of the community grant committees..IEG, PEG, FDC...is evaluating the feasibility of the projects, the impact of work, and giving feedback. This work needs the assistance of paid staff to make sure all the information needed to make decision is available. Then volunteers to look at the information and give a recommendation. I'm not clear on how the work flow you suggest would get the important aspects of the work accomplished. I'm not opposed to a group outside of WMF taking over this type of work. But there was a huge vacuum in the movement around Learning and Evaluation until recently. The WMF began doing this work for lack of anyone else doing it well. At this point, I can't see an independent organization being feasible. Instead of small Project and Event Grants, micro grants, or travel grants, many organizations are asking for unrestricted funds to pay for staff, offices, equipment, specialized staff for software development. They want to have funds to make long term plans with GLAM partner organizations. The evaluation of these large grant requests is extremely time consuming. Our current method of asking a group of volunteers to be available to this type of work a set period of time, and having it also open for other community comment seems to the best approach to make sure every project get a fair look. Today there are dozens of ideas for projects on meta waiting for people to comment and offer assistance of some type. I'm in favor of doing more to encourage members of the wikimedia movement to come to meta and join in working on them. IdeaLab. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Ideas Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Edward Saperia edsape...@gmail.com wrote: This reminds me of a slightly heretical idea I had a while ago while thinking about crowdfunding and WMF fundraising... Currently the WMF raises money via site banners, and spends these on programmes and disburses them via grants, which go to all kinds of projects - education, outreach, development, Wikimedians in Residence, etc etc. Despite the relative openness of the WMF as an organisation, this is still a very centralised, top down method of handling (the disbursement of) these funds. If we're truly going down the everything open, everything community driven route, the more consistent approach would be something like the following: The community submit funding proposals for projects they want to do, of any kind. Each has a campaign page with a description of the project (much like a kickstarter page, with project milestones, background, team etc), a monetary target they're trying to raise, and a banner design. These projects compete for advertising time on the site banner via a community curated queue; When they're at the top of this queue, they're displayed on the banners, which lead to their project pages; if they hit their fundraising target, they're taken down; if they have a low conversion rate (% of views that lead to donations), they're demoted down the queue and, if persistently low, rejected entirely. The criteria for prioritisation of projects in the queue and the vetting of project quality is done organically by the community, who would create and evolve guidelines and policies. The actual handling of the queue could be done algorithmically via an openly editable algorithm, or even done manually like with e.g. WP:ITN - you'd just need a widget that tells you how much a given project has raised so far and what the conversion rate is. If the community is concerned about people being shown too many banners, we dial down the number of people being shown banners, or raise the bar in terms of acceptable conversion rates. If a project raises money and is ultimately considered a failure, then hopefully the community will learn from this and provide more support / be more careful with that kind of project in the future. However, one hopes that this
[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia OTRS Annual Report
Hi everyone, it is my pleasure to announce the release of the 2014 annual report on Wikimedia's OTRS and specifically the Volunteer Response Team's activities. Please find it at https://tools.wmflabs.org/otrsreports/annual/2014 If you have any questions or comments, please leave them at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:OTRS/Reports/2014. About OTRS/the Volunteer Response Team: The Volunteer Response Team is the group of volunteers that handles email traffic related to the Wikimedia projects, from general inquiries to file permission emails. The software they use is called OTRS, and our installation of OTRS is also used by several other users within our movement, including chapters, WMF staff, oversighters, Wikimania organizers etc. For more information, see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OTRS. On behalf of the OTRS administrators, Patrik (User:Pajz) ___ 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] 10th anniversary celebration of Bengali Wikipedia
Wow! Fantastic news. All the best to Bengali Wikipedians. -RK On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Hasive, Nurunnaby nhas...@wikimedia.org.bd wrote: Dear All, We're happy to share with you that Bengali Wikipedia has completed it's 10 year journey a few months back. To celebrate this historic milestone We the poeple from Bengali Wikimedia Community and Wikimedia Bangladesh is going to arrange a Gala event on February 26, 2015 at Radisson Blu Water Garden Hotel in Dhaka. The event is supported by Grameenphone (It is a joint venture between Telenor and Grameen Telecom Corporation), is the leading telecommunications service provider in Bangladesh. We are so happy that *Jimmy Wales* is going to join with us as a chief guest. We are excited to have him with us and hope to share the program details with you soon. BTW, This visit is the first visit of Jimbo in Bangladesh. Note: This event is a part of the series program, we'll arrange another two days conference probably the last week of March. Cheers. -- *Hasive * Global User: Hasive http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hasive Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Hasive Member | GAC Committee, Wikimedia Foundation http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Grant_Advisory_Committee Member | IEG Committee, Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/People Director | Wikimedia Bangladesh Operations Committee http://www.wikimedia.org.bd fb.com/nhasive | @nhasive http://www.twitter.com/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, 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] [Wikimediameta-l] An alternative model for grant funding
I'm not sure you've understood correctly. In my proposed system, people propose projects and these projects are advertised on the centralnotice banners. When clicked on, readers are taken to the individual project pages and donate to them directly, rather than donating into a central pot. (a) people put forth their own money, and therefore assume the element of risk themselves. Not sure what you mean here? Readers will donate their own money to individual projects. (b) people who participate in crowdfunding do so with highly variable amounts - from a few dollars to several thousands - according to how much interest they have, and that's an important dynamic of the funding process. Nothing stopping donors donating different amounts directly to projects. (c) many (most?) of the people who contribute to campaigns of this nature do so for the perks, or contribute /more/ to the funding because of the perks. Well, Wikipedia is successfully crowdfunded at the moment without perks. This just breaks it down into individual projects instead of crowdfunding the entire entity in one go. Intuition would suggest that we'd raise more money this way rather than less, because of the variety of campaigns, and the effectiveness of a community at evolving campaign designs over time. Of course, there's nothing stopping projects from offering perks either. Wikipedia swag perhaps? All the fulfilment logistics are already there via the official shop. ___ 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] [Wikimediameta-l] An alternative model for grant funding
In your scheme, items would not get moved up to be considered if they are not popular enough, right? From my experience working on wikimedia global committees, it would be likely that the volume of requests would be much larger than the capacity of the wikimedia movement to evaluate them. People join the movement primarily to create content with a smaller part being willing to do administrative website work. And an even smaller group being willing to do work around evaluation. Reader come to read content. So well populated parts of the movement would have a huge advantage over less populated areas. Right now a small user group has a fair chance of getting funds to do a project that might be over shadowed by larger groups that had a constant flow of requests coming in. How do you propose that we make sure that funds are give out in a way that supports more diversity not less? Sydney Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Edward Saperia edsape...@gmail.com wrote: Of course you're very correct that there are many projects sitting around asking for scrutiny - the difference here is the (potential of) funding would be default yes instead of default no, with the discussion just around the priority. I expect that would attract a lot more attention very quickly indeed. *Edward Saperia* email edsape...@gmail.com • facebook http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia • twitter http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia • 07796955572 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG On 25 February 2015 at 15:38, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pretty concerned that the systematic biases in the wikimedia movement would be continued if there was no organized effort to do a comprehensive review of all proposals to see where we are lacking diversity. I'm in favor of having more focused funding calls like the Inspire Gender Gap campaign. A large part of the work of the community grant committees..IEG, PEG, FDC...is evaluating the feasibility of the projects, the impact of work, and giving feedback. This work needs the assistance of paid staff to make sure all the information needed to make decision is available. Then volunteers to look at the information and give a recommendation. I'm not clear on how the work flow you suggest would get the important aspects of the work accomplished. I'm not opposed to a group outside of WMF taking over this type of work. But there was a huge vacuum in the movement around Learning and Evaluation until recently. The WMF began doing this work for lack of anyone else doing it well. At this point, I can't see an independent organization being feasible. Instead of small Project and Event Grants, micro grants, or travel grants, many organizations are asking for unrestricted funds to pay for staff, offices, equipment, specialized staff for software development. They want to have funds to make long term plans with GLAM partner organizations. The evaluation of these large grant requests is extremely time consuming. Our current method of asking a group of volunteers to be available to this type of work a set period of time, and having it also open for other community comment seems to the best approach to make sure every project get a fair look. Today there are dozens of ideas for projects on meta waiting for people to comment and offer assistance of some type. I'm in favor of doing more to encourage members of the wikimedia movement to come to meta and join in working on them. IdeaLab. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Ideas Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Edward Saperia edsape...@gmail.com wrote: This reminds me of a slightly heretical idea I had a while ago while thinking about crowdfunding and WMF fundraising... Currently the WMF raises money via site banners, and spends these on programmes and disburses them via grants, which go to all kinds of projects - education, outreach, development, Wikimedians in Residence, etc etc. Despite the relative openness of the WMF as an organisation, this is still a very centralised, top down method of handling (the disbursement of) these funds. If we're truly going down the everything open, everything community driven route, the more consistent approach would be something like the following: The community submit funding proposals for projects they want to do, of any kind. Each has a campaign page with a description of the project (much like a kickstarter page, with project milestones, background, team etc), a monetary target they're trying to raise, and a banner design. These projects compete for advertising time on the site banner via a community curated queue; When they're at the top of this queue, they're displayed on the
Re: [Wikimedia-l] 10th anniversary celebration of Bengali Wikipedia
This is terrific news- congrats! On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Katy Love kl...@wikimedia.org wrote: Congratulations to you and the Bengali community on the 10 year anniversary! Katy On Feb 25, 2015, at 7:52 AM, RadhaKrishna Arvapally arkris...@wikimedia.in wrote: Wow! Fantastic news. All the best to Bengali Wikipedians. -RK On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:57 PM, Hasive, Nurunnaby nhas...@wikimedia.org.bd wrote: Dear All, We're happy to share with you that Bengali Wikipedia has completed it's 10 year journey a few months back. To celebrate this historic milestone We the poeple from Bengali Wikimedia Community and Wikimedia Bangladesh is going to arrange a Gala event on February 26, 2015 at Radisson Blu Water Garden Hotel in Dhaka. The event is supported by Grameenphone (It is a joint venture between Telenor and Grameen Telecom Corporation), is the leading telecommunications service provider in Bangladesh. We are so happy that *Jimmy Wales* is going to join with us as a chief guest. We are excited to have him with us and hope to share the program details with you soon. BTW, This visit is the first visit of Jimbo in Bangladesh. Note: This event is a part of the series program, we'll arrange another two days conference probably the last week of March. Cheers. -- *Hasive * Global User: Hasive http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hasive Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:Hasive Member | GAC Committee, Wikimedia Foundation http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Grant_Advisory_Committee Member | IEG Committee, Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/People Director | Wikimedia Bangladesh Operations Committee http://www.wikimedia.org.bd fb.com/nhasive | @nhasive http://www.twitter.com/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, 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 -- Luis Villa Sr. Director of Community Engagement Wikimedia Foundation *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment.* ___ 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] New template URL to diff
Il 25/02/2015 10:49, Andy Mabbett ha scritto:
On 25 February 2015 at 07:27, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote:
I'd rather suggest a global JavaScript gadget to replace those URLs with
plain Special:Diff links, since the {{diff}} template does not work in
every
wiki.
Great; let me know when you've got that working.
That's it:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ricordisamoa/DiffAutoLinker.js
So? Have you ever tried it?
No. Is it a global gadget, yet?
We don't have actual global gadgets yet, but this code will work on Meta:
importScript( 'User:Ricordisamoa/DiffAutoLinker.js' );
___
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] [Wikimediameta-l] An alternative model for grant funding
Well, you could create a guideline that said In the interest of innovation, we should try and fund a diversity of projects and then with the community hash out what dimensions you care about for diversity in this context, and how far from equality you are happy to go without artificial interference, and then what interference should happen if you go outside that boundary. Let's say we've decided that we care about a diversity in where project leads come from. Then you'd create a way to record from where successful projects are from, and if there is a lack of diversity then this will be obvious - like how it works with rotating Wikimania around different continents: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania/past I actually imagine that while this list would rarely be empty, the individual items on it would be burned through very fast; it'd be like the front page of Reddit. Most projects would be looking for small amounts of money, so they'd either get fully funded in hours, or are shown to have a low conversion rate and get kicked back down the queue - unless we're holding them there because we think funding them is critical. Also presumably we'd have an empirically derived cut-off conversion rate; if after x thousand views, fewer than 0.???% of viewers donate on a proposed project then it gets removed from the queue. If there are no projects in the queue then we don't show any banners at all. So if people are complaining that we show too many banners, they can instead try and quantify how much by arguing to raise this cut-off rate by a certain amount. *Edward Saperia* email edsape...@gmail.com • facebook http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia • twitter http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia • 07796955572 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG On 25 February 2015 at 16:24, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote: In your scheme, items would not get moved up to be considered if they are not popular enough, right? From my experience working on wikimedia global committees, it would be likely that the volume of requests would be much larger than the capacity of the wikimedia movement to evaluate them. People join the movement primarily to create content with a smaller part being willing to do administrative website work. And an even smaller group being willing to do work around evaluation. Reader come to read content. So well populated parts of the movement would have a huge advantage over less populated areas. Right now a small user group has a fair chance of getting funds to do a project that might be over shadowed by larger groups that had a constant flow of requests coming in. How do you propose that we make sure that funds are give out in a way that supports more diversity not less? Sydney Sydney Poore User:FloNight Wikipedian in Residence at Cochrane Collaboration On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Edward Saperia edsape...@gmail.com wrote: Of course you're very correct that there are many projects sitting around asking for scrutiny - the difference here is the (potential of) funding would be default yes instead of default no, with the discussion just around the priority. I expect that would attract a lot more attention very quickly indeed. *Edward Saperia* email edsape...@gmail.com • facebook http://www.facebook.com/edsaperia • twitter http://www.twitter.com/edsaperia • 07796955572 133-135 Bethnal Green Road, E2 7DG On 25 February 2015 at 15:38, Sydney Poore sydney.po...@gmail.com wrote: I'm pretty concerned that the systematic biases in the wikimedia movement would be continued if there was no organized effort to do a comprehensive review of all proposals to see where we are lacking diversity. I'm in favor of having more focused funding calls like the Inspire Gender Gap campaign. A large part of the work of the community grant committees..IEG, PEG, FDC...is evaluating the feasibility of the projects, the impact of work, and giving feedback. This work needs the assistance of paid staff to make sure all the information needed to make decision is available. Then volunteers to look at the information and give a recommendation. I'm not clear on how the work flow you suggest would get the important aspects of the work accomplished. I'm not opposed to a group outside of WMF taking over this type of work. But there was a huge vacuum in the movement around Learning and Evaluation until recently. The WMF began doing this work for lack of anyone else doing it well. At this point, I can't see an independent organization being feasible. Instead of small Project and Event Grants, micro grants, or travel grants, many organizations are asking for unrestricted funds to pay for staff, offices, equipment, specialized staff for software development. They want to have funds to make long term plans with GLAM partner organizations. The evaluation of these large grant requests is
[Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] This week on the Wikimedia Blog
Greetings! Here are some of the stories featured this week on the Wikimedia Blog: • Join the Wikimedia strategy consultation https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/02/23/strategy-consultation/ • Black History Month edit-a-thons tackle Wikipedia’s multicultural gaps https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/02/24/black-history-month-edit-a-thons/ • Wiki Loves Africa photo contest announces winning pictures https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/02/23/wiki-loves-africa-photo-contest/ • Wikimedia Foundation supports Twitter’s fight for transparency http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/02/19/wikimedia-foundation-twitter-transparency/ • Survey: What do Pakistani readers think of Wikipedia? https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/02/20/pakistani-readers-survey/ • Report finds the Wikimedia Foundation to be the largest known Participatory Grantmaking Fund. http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/02/19/wmf-largest-participatory-grantmaking/ • Wikimedia Highlights, January 2015 http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/02/17/wikimedia-highlights-january-2015/ Next month, we will feature stories about women and closing the gender gap, in honor of International Women's Day on March 8. If you have good stories to share on this topic, please submit a draft on the Wikimedia Blog project hub: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Blog Best regards, Fabrice ___ Fabrice Florin Movement Communications Manager Wikimedia Foundation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fabrice_Florin_(WMF) ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Train the Trainer Program-India
Dear Wikimedians, The Wikimedia TTT-2015, a four day residential training workshop to groom leadership skills among the Indian Wikimedia volunteer community, will begin tomorrow. This is curated and run by CIS-A2K [1] with the help of Wikimedia volunteers. About 30 Wikimedians from across 12 Indian languages and from various part of the country will be taking part in this workshop in Bangalore. This time we also have some Wikimedians from Nepal joining the program. This is the second such event held in India, the first one was in 2013. For more details see the event page here [2]. Best, Vishnu [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Access_To_Knowledge [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/India_Access_To_Knowledge/Events/Train_the_Trainer_Program/2015 ___ 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] [Wikimediameta-l] An alternative model for grant funding
On 15-02-25 11:15 AM, Edward Saperia wrote: I'm not sure you've understood correctly. In my proposed system, people propose projects and these projects are advertised on the centralnotice banners. Ah, I indeed hadn't. My understanding was that you wanted to substitute for the grants process(es) but that the actual source of funding would remain the WMF coffers. In which case I need to reclassify your idea from intriguing to horrifying in my opinion. Not because I find anything fundamentally objectionable to crowdfunding (I do not, and have indeed thrown money at a number of cool crowdfunded projects in the past) but because - as FloNight noted - this is an invitation to formalize and cement systemic bias to an insane degree. All the knowlegde - not all the knowledge someone is willing and able to afford. Beyond which is the simple reality that many things you'll find no shortage of agreement that they need to be done are, fundamentally, unsexy and unimpressive. You would be hard-pressed to make a workable marketing campaign for them, and quickly find that the boring stuff gets underfunded no matter how important. I still think there is something to the idea of trying to work in more crowdsourcing to the project financing processes - being able to create a lightweight and attractive way of getting a vast number of community members to weigh in on the relative desirability of ways to spend money towards the projects /is/ a laudable objective. -- 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] Wikimedia OTRS Annual Report
Thank you for this fascinating report, and this is another opportunity to thank all OTRS agents across the movement, for their tireless and largely-unsung work. I, for one, make it a point to mention and advocate for OTRS. I am curious in my volunteer capacity about the prominence of the commons-permissions-he queue among other permission queues and relative to the size of the Hebrew Wikipedia. Does anyone have a good theory to explain it? A. On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 7:48 AM, pajz pajzm...@gmail.com wrote: Hi everyone, it is my pleasure to announce the release of the 2014 annual report on Wikimedia's OTRS and specifically the Volunteer Response Team's activities. Please find it at https://tools.wmflabs.org/otrsreports/annual/2014 If you have any questions or comments, please leave them at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:OTRS/Reports/2014. About OTRS/the Volunteer Response Team: The Volunteer Response Team is the group of volunteers that handles email traffic related to the Wikimedia projects, from general inquiries to file permission emails. The software they use is called OTRS, and our installation of OTRS is also used by several other users within our movement, including chapters, WMF staff, oversighters, Wikimania organizers etc. For more information, see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/OTRS. On behalf of the OTRS administrators, Patrik (User:Pajz) ___ 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 -- Asaf Bartov Wikimedia Foundation http://www.wikimediafoundation.org Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! https://donate.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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] User Group Brazil Activities Report
Interestingly to see on the report that even under so much criticism, the Brazilian Catalyst Program, coordinated by Oona Castro through a partnership between the Wikimedia Foundation and Ação Educativa was crucial in creating and supporting great part of the activities listed by the user group, since its foundation. Best regards and congratulations to all the people involved. Rodrigo Padula 2015-02-25 21:19 GMT-03:00 Vinicius Siqueira vinicius.sme...@gmail.com: The Wikimedia Community User Group Brasil just published its descriptive report regarding to the activities developed since January 2014. This report summarizes the activities developed as part of the effort to consolidate the Group in Brazil and to empower the Wikimedia projects in the country. Link: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Brasil/Report/2014 Sincerely, Vinicius Siqueira ___ 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] User Group Brazil Activities Report
Nobody ever said that the Catalyst was a total failure. It had indeed good points. The thing is that I am not the only one with the opinion that the results were clearly not good enough for what was expected from all money invested and it is quite not fair to compare them with a volunteer effort with obviously less resources. Catalyst was cited 3 times in all report, and its members were always kind and helpful on relating with User Group. Sometimes they were just the contact and other times they were crucial for the work, but there were also other moments in which they had absolutely nothing to do with what was done by User Group members. It actually just doesn't serve as a good measure, nor comparison to evaluate Catalyst Program. Regards. 2015-02-25 23:31 GMT-03:00 Rodrigo Padula rodrigopad...@gmail.com: Interestingly to see on the report that even under so much criticism, the Brazilian Catalyst Program, coordinated by Oona Castro through a partnership between the Wikimedia Foundation and Ação Educativa was crucial in creating and supporting great part of the activities listed by the user group, since its foundation. Best regards and congratulations to all the people involved. Rodrigo Padula 2015-02-25 21:19 GMT-03:00 Vinicius Siqueira vinicius.sme...@gmail.com: The Wikimedia Community User Group Brasil just published its descriptive report regarding to the activities developed since January 2014. This report summarizes the activities developed as part of the effort to consolidate the Group in Brazil and to empower the Wikimedia projects in the country. Link: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Brasil/Report/2014 Sincerely, Vinicius Siqueira ___ 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 -- *Lucas Teles* *Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia.*https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles Contact me: [image: Facebook] http://www.facebook.com/telesr https://www.facebook.com/telesr http://www.facebook.com/telesr [image: Twitter] http://www.twitter.com/Lucas_Teles https://twitter.com/Lucas_Teles [image: Skype] lucastelesr Mobile: 55 71 9374 2725 I am a Wikimedia volunteer. Wikimedia Foundation can not be held responsible for my actions. ___ 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] User Group Brazil Activities Report
Good! You just confirmed my point of view!! Probably the cost / benefit of the Brazilian Catalyst Program was not the best one, but the program ended fulfilling its catalytic role of the Brazilian community, supporting the creation of networking, partnerships and activities. Best regards Rodrigo Padula 2015-02-26 0:02 GMT-03:00 Lucas Teles telesw...@gmail.com: Nobody ever said that the Catalyst was a total failure. It had indeed good points. The thing is that I am not the only one with the opinion that the results were clearly not good enough for what was expected from all money invested and it is quite not fair to compare them with a volunteer effort with obviously less resources. Catalyst was cited 3 times in all report, and its members were always kind and helpful on relating with User Group. Sometimes they were just the contact and other times they were crucial for the work, but there were also other moments in which they had absolutely nothing to do with what was done by User Group members. It actually just doesn't serve as a good measure, nor comparison to evaluate Catalyst Program. Regards. 2015-02-25 23:31 GMT-03:00 Rodrigo Padula rodrigopad...@gmail.com: Interestingly to see on the report that even under so much criticism, the Brazilian Catalyst Program, coordinated by Oona Castro through a partnership between the Wikimedia Foundation and Ação Educativa was crucial in creating and supporting great part of the activities listed by the user group, since its foundation. Best regards and congratulations to all the people involved. Rodrigo Padula 2015-02-25 21:19 GMT-03:00 Vinicius Siqueira vinicius.sme...@gmail.com : The Wikimedia Community User Group Brasil just published its descriptive report regarding to the activities developed since January 2014. This report summarizes the activities developed as part of the effort to consolidate the Group in Brazil and to empower the Wikimedia projects in the country. Link: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Brasil/Report/2014 Sincerely, Vinicius Siqueira ___ 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 -- *Lucas Teles* *Steward at Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator * *at Portuguese Wikipedia.*https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Teles Contact me: [image: Facebook] http://www.facebook.com/telesr https://www.facebook.com/telesr http://www.facebook.com/telesr [image: Twitter] http://www.twitter.com/Lucas_Teles https://twitter.com/Lucas_Teles [image: Skype] lucastelesr Mobile: 55 71 9374 2725 I am a Wikimedia volunteer. Wikimedia Foundation can not be held responsible for my actions. ___ 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] Wikimedia OTRS Annual Report
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Asaf Bartov abar...@wikimedia.org wrote: Thank you for this fascinating report, and this is another opportunity to thank all OTRS agents across the movement, for their tireless and largely-unsung work. I, for one, make it a point to mention and advocate for OTRS. +1! The OTRS volunteers are heroes. -- phoebe p.s. The report layout/webpage is lovely! could it be used for other reports? -- * I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers at gmail.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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who are the nicest people on our projects ?
Fæ wrote: Re: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Faebot/thanks I am glad the tables are useful, hopefully stimulating more positive use of the thanks notifier by contributors. The reports are updating *slowly*, currently at April 2014... This is in part because of the WMFlabs outage yesterday, though in general any report of the logging table is going to be slow (it is the largest table on the wiki database). The first run-through will take several days as it is going back through all of 2014. Once it is only reporting on the previous month, I suspect it will finish monthly updates within the first first day. Hi. Hmm, I'm not sure how you're measuring largest, but I imagine on most wikis there are more rows in the revision table than there are in the logging table. For example, on the English Wikipedia, there are approximately 598,859,006 rows in the revision table and 62,731,285 rows in the logging table. I suspect on most wikis, revision, text, and maybe archive would typically be larger than logging, except in weird cases such as loginwiki[_p]. And then of course there are the *links tables. But it depends on whether you're comparing size on disk or number of rows. You probably want to use logging_userindex instead of logging. The former is typically significantly faster due to the way we use table views. I have a bit of experience with database reports. Off-hand I'd say it should be possible to query all of this information in under an hour. With the index on logging[_userindex].log_action, even a large table such as logging shouldn't be too awful to query for this information. If you have queries that are taking a very long time, we should probably investigate. MZMcBride ___ 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 OTRS Annual Report
Patrik and everyone else involved in this -- this is pretty amazing work. Thanks for everything you do, and thank you for documenting it so clearly. -- Erik Möller VP of Product Strategy, Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia OTRS Annual Report
Hi. Re: https://tools.wmflabs.org/otrsreports/annual/2014 phoebe ayers wrote: p.s. The report layout/webpage is lovely! could it be used for other reports? I'm curious about this as well. I see that source code is mentioned at https://tools.wmflabs.org/otrsreports/index.html, but I didn't see a link off-hand. If a code repository exists somewhere that people could contribute to, it might be nice to add a link in the footer. Just poking around the HTML page source, the report seems to be built using at least jQuery, Bootstrap, and xtable. Very neat, I'd be interested to learn more. I also left a note on the wiki talk page about preserving this report. I'm pretty concerned that these micro-sites won't last nearly as long as the wikis, which is probably fine and to be expected, but I want to make sure we don't lose important historical data. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:OTRS/Reports/2014#Preserving_history MZMcBride ___ 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] New template URL to diff
On 25 February 2015 at 07:27, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote:
I'd rather suggest a global JavaScript gadget to replace those URLs with
plain Special:Diff links, since the {{diff}} template does not work in
every
wiki.
Great; let me know when you've got that working.
That's it:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ricordisamoa/DiffAutoLinker.js
So? Have you ever tried it?
No. Is it a global gadget, yet?
--
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] Who are the nicest people on our projects ?
Hi, an outcome of the old milgram experiments suggests that not always nice people do oppress others less: http://m.mic.com/articles/92479/psychologists-have-uncovered-a-troubling-feature-of-people-who-seem-nice-all-the-time Rupert On Feb 25, 2015 8:31 AM, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote: Thanks Fæ, those reports are very interesting from my perspective. However, even though the number of thanks received may be more reliable than the usual edit count, none of them could ever measure the invaluable impact of our contributors :-) Il 23/02/2015 16:57, Fæ ha scritto: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Faebot/thanks I have now set up a monthly report of the top 10 thankers / thankees with an index to the different project reports on the above link. These have been generated retrospectively for 2014 and I will shortly set this up on WMF labs to run at the beginning of each month to add last month's results.* Rather than running this automatically for several hundred projects, I am happy to add projects on request (so long as the thanks extension is being regularly used by more than 10 people!). Just drop a note on my meta talk page to request the addition. I have haphazardly picked 6 of the busiest projects to get started on, mainly as a multi-language test, not because I favour one language Wikipedia over another. :-) Time for someone to create a thank you barnstar of super thanks ? This is one of many ad-hoc reports run as Faebot, but if it becomes especially useful or critical to outreach projects I'll consider moving a stable version to a special bot account or similar. * - At the time of writing, the tables for 2014 are being generated. This may take the rest of the day to complete! If your project has recently been added, the reports might have to wait for the next monthly run depending on how much free wiki-time I have. 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 ___ 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] Fwd: Wikimedia Hackathon travel sponsorship
A forward for technical and tech-curious people not subscribed to wikitech-l. If you have or want to join a hackathon plan for Lyon (May 23-25), we want to know. Important note: Wikimedia Hackathons are not only for developers, as good software development requires many other profiles, including insightful users. Chapter people and other organized wikimedians, your help funding volunteer travel is welcome. Every year we are pooling more funds from more orgs, opening our hackathons to more volunteers from more places and areas of interest. Please send one volunteer or more to Lyon. More information and feedback at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88523 -- Forwarded message -- From: Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org Date: Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:02 AM Subject: Wikimedia Hackathon travel sponsorship To: Wikimedia developers wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi, we are hoping to open registration to the Wikimedia Hackathon in Lyon next week. Those of you relying on travel sponsorship can start preparing your requests already now: # Familiarize yourself with the goals of the hackathon: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Hackathons#The_Wikimedia_Hackathon_model # Join or propose a demo-able project in Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/wikimedia-hackathon-2015/ # Find a hackathon buddy in the Wikimedia communities or related projects out there: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Lyon_Hackathon_2015/Buddies Here you have a draft form to get an idea of what questions you will be asked: http://goo.gl/forms/MPzx8q7BBz (not a real form; data submitted will be ignored and deleted) Your feedback about the process is welcome, especially in the related Phabricator task: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88406 -- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil ___ 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] Fwd: Wikimedia Hackathon travel sponsorship
Quim, Thanks for bringing this up. The subject of non-developers attending hackathons came up in at least one recent off-list conversation. I think it would be interesting to have a sampling of experienced Wikimedians present who may not be developers but who are expert end-users of MediaWiki. They might provide some valuable suggestions to those who are conceptualizing or testing design changes or new features. I thinking of the supposedly extensive research that was done on MediaViewer, and then the later discoveries that the early research was unrepresentative of the actual population of end users, resulting in much drama and considerable doubt about the wisdom of spending millions of dollars on MediaViewer in the first place. So I very much appreciate the Foundation's willingness to send people to hackathons who are not developers, but who represent important parts of the ecosystem in which development happens. (: Pine Pine *This is an Encyclopedia* https://www.wikipedia.org/ *One gateway to the wide garden of knowledge, where lies The deep rock of our past, in which we must delve The well of our future,The clear water we must leave untainted for those who come after us,The fertile earth, in which truth may grow in bright places, tended by many hands,And the broad fall of sunshine, warming our first steps toward knowing how much we do not know.* *—Catherine Munro* On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 12:14 AM, Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org wrote: A forward for technical and tech-curious people not subscribed to wikitech-l. If you have or want to join a hackathon plan for Lyon (May 23-25), we want to know. Important note: Wikimedia Hackathons are not only for developers, as good software development requires many other profiles, including insightful users. Chapter people and other organized wikimedians, your help funding volunteer travel is welcome. Every year we are pooling more funds from more orgs, opening our hackathons to more volunteers from more places and areas of interest. Please send one volunteer or more to Lyon. More information and feedback at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88523 -- Forwarded message -- From: Quim Gil q...@wikimedia.org Date: Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:02 AM Subject: Wikimedia Hackathon travel sponsorship To: Wikimedia developers wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi, we are hoping to open registration to the Wikimedia Hackathon in Lyon next week. Those of you relying on travel sponsorship can start preparing your requests already now: # Familiarize yourself with the goals of the hackathon: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Hackathons#The_Wikimedia_Hackathon_model # Join or propose a demo-able project in Phabricator: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/wikimedia-hackathon-2015/ # Find a hackathon buddy in the Wikimedia communities or related projects out there: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Lyon_Hackathon_2015/Buddies Here you have a draft form to get an idea of what questions you will be asked: http://goo.gl/forms/MPzx8q7BBz (not a real form; data submitted will be ignored and deleted) Your feedback about the process is welcome, especially in the related Phabricator task: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88406 -- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil ___ 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
