[Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread James Heilman 
1) Yes everyone realizes that using a non free image in our fundraising
banners is not okay. It was a mistake. These things happen and we correct
them.

2) When is it okay to run smaller commercial ads rather than larger
fundraising banners? Never. I would much rather see the WMF become smaller
than to see ads run.

-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com

As of July 2015 I am a board member of the Wikimedia Foundation
My emails; however, do not represent the official position of the WMF
___
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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Gerard Meijssen 
Hoi,
I rather see the WMF pick up the work that it does not do. Money seems to
be a dirty word but it is what makes some things possible. Money is raised
by adverts. DEAL WITH IT

When people say that they rather see the WMF and its need for money become
less, they typically are well served . They complain for ideological
reasons about Wikipedia Zero and they have all the bandwidth in the world.
They think the gender gap is so big but that is cultural. The excuses why
countries like Syria are so badly served in Wikipedia are hardly expressed
because as a problem it does not even register.

Wikidata, Wikisource suck big time in the usability department. For
Wikidata the only tool that provides information from the data glut is
Reasonator. For Wikisource the notion of readers is not really considered.
Get real, we are immature and a lot of the big work is ahead of us not
behind us. Consequently our need for funding will increase not decrease.

Having a centrally led fundraising is part of the problem. It is concerned
about "global" issues and it does not even see the local need or
opportunity. Consequently it does not raise the amount of money in
countries like the Netherlands it could.

And now you want to curtail our future because some people dislike ads ?
REALLY you should be ashamed, I dislike ads but I like our future more.
Thanks,
GerardM

On 4 December 2015 at 05:25, James Heilman  wrote:

> 1) Yes everyone realizes that using a non free image in our fundraising
> banners is not okay. It was a mistake. These things happen and we correct
> them.
>
> 2) When is it okay to run smaller commercial ads rather than larger
> fundraising banners? Never. I would much rather see the WMF become smaller
> than to see ads run.
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
>
> As of July 2015 I am a board member of the Wikimedia Foundation
> My emails; however, do not represent the official position of the WMF
> ___
> 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] Product Department Office Hour with Wes Moran, Thursday, 10 December

2015-12-03 Thread Rachel diCerbo 
Hi there,

The WMF has scheduled an office hour with Wes Moran, VP of Product, for
Thursday 10 December, at 20:00 UTC. We can use the time as an informal meet
and greet, or ask questions about product process, strategy, and planning.
You can participate in #wikimedia-office on Freenode, and logs will be
posted afterwards.

You can find the relevant information, including your timezone, here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours#Upcoming_office_hours

Hope to see you there :)
rachel


-- 

Rachel diCerbo
Director of Community Engagement (Product)
Wikimedia Foundation
Rdicerb (WMF) 
@a_rachel 
___
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 banner (again)

2015-12-03 Thread Andreas Kolbe 
Article in the Washington Post:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2015/12/02/wikipedia-has-a-ton-of-money-so-why-is-it-begging-you-to-donate-yours/
___
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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Andrea Zanni 
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> Under the redesigned grants scheme, WMF Project grants might be able to
> help with this kind of software development work for Commons and/or
> Wikisource. I happen to know a developer here in Cascadia who might be
> interested, either as an individual or in association with a Wikimedia
> affiliate, in doing this kind of work on a grant or contract basis.
>
> Pinging Kacie for comment about possible grant funding. (:
>


Hi Pine, thanks for the comment.
I understand what you mean, and I do believe there is space to work on
Wikisource via grants, BUT.

But I already did a Individual Engagement Grant in 2013 (with David Cuenca)
regarding Wikisource.
It was great, but IEGs don't give you staff time. So me and David used
Google Summer of Code, and we mentored 4 projects: if I'm not mistaken,
only one was really finished, meaning it produced concrete results on
Wikisource. Others stopped before (for example, two dedicated mediawiki
extensions were not put in production). Within the IEG, we made a big
survey among Wikisource communities, to develop a wishlist and a roadmap
for WS communities. We set up a Wikisource Community User Group. We talked
and talked. Bugs were and are reported, from years. Two weeks ago, we
convened the very first internationl Wikisource conference, in Vienna,
hosted by Wikimedia Austria (3 members from WMF were there, and we had a
great and productive time, reports will follow).

I've personally been involved in all of these efforts, so I've also seen
that real impact of Wikisource infrastructure (core WS extension, design,
interface, performance, development) has been minimal. I don't really want
to have this conversation here and now, but I have had a fair amount of
experience in this to say that until the WMF (or some affiliate big enough
and high enough in the software pipeline) commit to WS, change won't
magically happen by itself. We have practically one real volunteer
developer, and he's full of work to do (also, I already asked him if he
would like to receive a grant to work on certain issues, and he can't, and
he's the only one who could do that, thanks to his unique experience).

Grant works for little things, I'm afraid. Major change requires something
else.

Aubrey
___
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] A moderator's Pleas

2015-12-03 Thread Richard Ames 
All -

Please use a new subject line when introducing a new topic.  Please start
the thread with a new message (not a reply) to
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

More frequent posters: please consider the soft limit of 30 posts per
month... see: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l

Regards, Richard.
___
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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Andrea Zanni 
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> For me Commons and Wikisource could do with an abundant sprinkling of
> improved user interface.
>

Well, of course.
But, from where I see it, this is something to be address centrally:
Commons and Wikisource communities are fairly small and at least in
Wikisource we don't have any volunteer designers or UX people. The amount
of staff time dedicated from the WMF to Wikisource is zero, from the
beginning (I don't know about Commons). So, yes, you're right, but this is
not a problem that communities can solve by themselves.

Aubrey

(sorry for the OT)
___
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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Jane Darnell 
This is exactly why we need "Stuctured Data for Commons" and I for one was
really disappointed to see it get tossed onto the back burner yet again:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2015_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Archive#Structured_metadata_for_Commons

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 6:35 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> It is. I am one of the people who agitated for Commons to be created in the
> first place. I care about Commons and I hate the lack of usability with a
> passion. Wikimedians on the other hand cost us additional money in order to
> cope with Commons.
>
> What is your problem in acknowledging that using Commons is a big problem.
> It is so bad that I typically refuse to add categories because they are not
> easy to guess and therefore to apply. At some stage it is at least what I
> hoped for, a repository for use for WMF projects. As a re-use facility it
> is a failure.
> Thanks,
>GerardM
>
> On 3 December 2015 at 00:09, Gnangarra  wrote:
>
> > There is a big difference here between an individual and the Wikimedia
> > Foundation using Wikimedia Commons
> >
> > On 3 December 2015 at 07:03, Gerard Meijssen 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > There is an excuse. You may know those categories, I do not and I do
> not
> > > even try to find images in Commons for my blog. It is too hard to find
> > > things. The search is neither efficient nor intuitive.
> > >
> > > For me Commons and Wikisource could do with an abundant sprinkling of
> > > improved user interface. It is geared up for people adding data not
> > really
> > > for people using data. The approach is way too dogmatic as well. So no,
> > > thank you.
> > > Thanks,
> > >   GerardM
> > >
> > > On 2 December 2015 at 23:56, Gnangarra  wrote:
> > >
> > > > 29 million photos, 30 seconds type category:coffee cups
> > > > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Coffee_cups  90 photos
> > > > subcategory cups of coffee a further 700 images not really difficult
> to
> > > > find or navigate to what you need.
> > > >
> > > > There is no excuse for fundraising team to not use a Free licensed
> > > > photograph and message to the community they are suppose to be trying
> > to
> > > > support and promote either on commons-l or here sayo=ing they need an
> > > image
> > > > of a cup of coffee from above would have got them even more to choose
> > > from,
> > > >
> > > > On 2 December 2015 at 22:53, Marc A. Pelletier 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On 15-12-02 09:46 AM, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> > > > > > It wouldnt have been hard to make a free photo of a coffee, or
> even
> > > > > > create a derivative of this lovely CC0 SVG
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think I'm concerned about the foundation fundraising staff
> > > > > deciding to use a stock photo - expedience and all, but I'm pretty
> > sure
> > > > > that had they known about that (absolutely gorgeous) SVG, they'd
> have
> > > > > used it.
> > > > >
> > > > > ... which I guess is my way of saying "OMG commons actually *sucks*
> > for
> > > > > reuse because it's so hard to find stuff on it that many people no
> > > > > longer even try!!1!one!".
> > > > >
> > > > > -- 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,
> > > > >  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > GN.
> > > > President Wikimedia Australia
> > > > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > > > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.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,
> > > 
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > GN.
> > President Wikimedia Australia
> > WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra
> > Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Pine W 
Under the redesigned grants scheme, WMF Project grants might be able to
help with this kind of software development work for Commons and/or
Wikisource. I happen to know a developer here in Cascadia who might be
interested, either as an individual or in association with a Wikimedia
affiliate, in doing this kind of work on a grant or contract basis.

Pinging Kacie for comment about possible grant funding. (:

Pine
On Dec 3, 2015 00:55, "Andrea Zanni"  wrote:

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 12:03 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> For me Commons and Wikisource could do with an abundant sprinkling of
> improved user interface.
>

Well, of course.
But, from where I see it, this is something to be address centrally:
Commons and Wikisource communities are fairly small and at least in
Wikisource we don't have any volunteer designers or UX people. The amount
of staff time dedicated from the WMF to Wikisource is zero, from the
beginning (I don't know about Commons). So, yes, you're right, but this is
not a problem that communities can solve by themselves.

Aubrey

(sorry for the OT)
___
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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Gerard Meijssen 
Hoi,
It is that time of year where money is asked from the people. Arguably we
would do more when the Wikimedia foundation was not so FF-ing Wikipedia
centred.The arguments for not giving Wikisource have passed their sell by
date and usability for exposing its wonderful work is imho a disfigurement
on the resume of the WMF (among others). This is a cheap one to fix. It
makes sense to fix it as I understand sources are part of "Wikimedia Zero"
and it would make a world of a difference when the sources can actually be
found.

Unicef among others has fundraising campaigns for education because it is
not its most important priority. As long as kids die because of lack of
food, safe water, preventable disease and temperature it is obvious why.
Such an excuse the WMF does not have. It could ask for additional funding
for Wikisource, for Wikidata for ... and it would have a solid argument.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 3 December 2015 at 10:25, Andrea Zanni  wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Pine W  wrote:
>
> > Under the redesigned grants scheme, WMF Project grants might be able to
> > help with this kind of software development work for Commons and/or
> > Wikisource. I happen to know a developer here in Cascadia who might be
> > interested, either as an individual or in association with a Wikimedia
> > affiliate, in doing this kind of work on a grant or contract basis.
> >
> > Pinging Kacie for comment about possible grant funding. (:
> >
>
>
> Hi Pine, thanks for the comment.
> I understand what you mean, and I do believe there is space to work on
> Wikisource via grants, BUT.
>
> But I already did a Individual Engagement Grant in 2013 (with David Cuenca)
> regarding Wikisource.
> It was great, but IEGs don't give you staff time. So me and David used
> Google Summer of Code, and we mentored 4 projects: if I'm not mistaken,
> only one was really finished, meaning it produced concrete results on
> Wikisource. Others stopped before (for example, two dedicated mediawiki
> extensions were not put in production). Within the IEG, we made a big
> survey among Wikisource communities, to develop a wishlist and a roadmap
> for WS communities. We set up a Wikisource Community User Group. We talked
> and talked. Bugs were and are reported, from years. Two weeks ago, we
> convened the very first internationl Wikisource conference, in Vienna,
> hosted by Wikimedia Austria (3 members from WMF were there, and we had a
> great and productive time, reports will follow).
>
> I've personally been involved in all of these efforts, so I've also seen
> that real impact of Wikisource infrastructure (core WS extension, design,
> interface, performance, development) has been minimal. I don't really want
> to have this conversation here and now, but I have had a fair amount of
> experience in this to say that until the WMF (or some affiliate big enough
> and high enough in the software pipeline) commit to WS, change won't
> magically happen by itself. We have practically one real volunteer
> developer, and he's full of work to do (also, I already asked him if he
> would like to receive a grant to work on certain issues, and he can't, and
> he's the only one who could do that, thanks to his unique experience).
>
> Grant works for little things, I'm afraid. Major change requires something
> else.
>
> Aubrey
> ___
> 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 banner (again)

2015-12-03 Thread Liam Wyatt 
TL;DR - we've reached "peak banner", how do we change the fundraising
model to be about working smarter, not just pushing harder. This needs
to be part of a broader process that involves strategic planning
transparency, endowment discussions, editor-recruitment, etc. Not just
about fullscreen advertising.

I, along with many here, am dismayed that the banners are now at the
stage of being fullscreen. However, as others have mentioned, the
actual text of the request has been adjusted following a reasonably
collaborative process to identify text that is both effective and
acceptable to the community. Also, the fundraising team have been
placed in the difficult position of being told to raise a LOT more
money without being given more methods to do so.[1] Naturally then,
there is a point where the existing methods reach their maximum
effectiveness, and capacity is stretched to the point where awkward
mistakes happen.[2]

At this point, I suspect we've reached "peak banner".

Rather like "peak oil" - after drilling the same oil reserve for a
long time, you have to pump exponentially harder to maintain a steady
flow.[2] Furthermore, the harder you pump today, the more difficult it
will be tomorrow. I think we've reached that point with the
fundraising advertising and emails. We know that the donation amounts
are decreasing, but the budget is increasing. There are many suggested
reasons for the decreased supply (relevant parables for this include
"killing the goose that laid the golden egg" and "the boy who cried
wolf"). So it's now time to talk about pumping smarter, not harder.

An important part of that shift is the recently-opened (but longtime
mooted) discussion about an endowment. I commend Lisa's essay[3] as an
excellent start to formulating a long-term plan. There are many
important questions that would need to be answered as part of that
strategy. People interested in this really ought to read her thoughts
on creating a "growing endowment" and the advantages/challenges this
would bring. Carefully and consultatively addressing the challenges in
creating an endowment would also go a long way towards fixing other
related concerns:

- Improving the transparency of the WMF strategy and the way decisions
are made (see also the discussion about the FDC recommendations[4])
- Having the global community, especially the Chapters which have
local fundraising capacity, involved in the fundraising process -
rather than being held at arms length. The community should be seen as
the fundraiser's biggest asset, not the pageview numbers.
- culturally sensitive communication (to avoid things like the email
saying "let's end this" being translated into French as the
*equivalent* of "I challenge you to a fight to the death")
- Integrating the activities of fundraising as "part of the movement"
rather than as something that is held/holds itself apart. The WMF
donor database, for example, has tens of thousands of people who would
be interested in learning to edit. Why have we never tried to create a
[privacy-policy-compliant] way of introducing those people to their
local communities/chapters to help address the other strategic
challenge of "editor recruitment and retention".
- Addressing some of the inequities of how money is
raised/disseminated across our movement which are based on rules
"grandfathered in" from chapter-fundraising rules prior to the "Haifa
letter".
- movement calendars (to avoid things like this year's fundraising
clash with WikiLovesMonuments)

Some people say that the fundraising goal is too high. Perhaps, but we
also have a long list of fixes-needed and wanted-features. We can't do
a lot more with a lot less, although we can certainly increase the
efficiency/transparency of how the existing WMF budget is spent!
However, with the increased total budget, also comes a increased
expectation of results. I think that a lot of my own frustration comes
from this - I could probably be supportive of a fullscreen banner IF I
felt the results justified it. But, for just one example, as Andrea
described today[5], Wikisource has NEVER received any dedicated
support despite years of that community begging for it.

I've probably written too much now... sorry!

-Liam

[1] Side note: If you'd like to apply for what is think is probably
the hardest (and therefore very important) job in Wikimedia, WMF
Fundraising is hiring a community-liaison role:
https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/113040?t=26r71l
[2] like saying "A year ago, you gave 0.00 € to keep Wikipedia online
and ad-free." https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120214
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil Yes, I realise the metaphor
isn't perfect. Oil is a non-renewable resource while donations are
potentially renewable.
[3] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Endowment_Essay
[4] and thank you Lila for your response on that topic thus far
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-November/079940.html
[5]

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimania-l] Community consultation on the future of Wikimania

2015-12-03 Thread Ellie Young 
Josh,

A lot of work has gone into preparing for  the consultation.It will be 
going out December 14.  We are looking forward to getting everyone's feedback 
in the weeks after and into early January.

Ellie

> On Dec 2, 2015, at 8:11 PM, Josh Lim  wrote:
> 
> Hi everybody,
> 
> Last October, Siko committed to a community consultation on the future of 
> Wikimania scheduled for November.[1] However, November came and went, and 
> nothing has happened since then.
> 
> As a matter of course, I have to ask whether the WMF is still committed to 
> holding a community consultation on Wikimania, and if so, when.  In addition, 
> we’d like to know what the WMF and the Wikimania Committee have been doing 
> since what happened last October that could allay all our fears over what’s 
> happening with the future of the community’s conference.
> 
> On behalf of the Wikimania Manila team,
> 
> Josh
> 
> [1] https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-October/079310.html
> 
> JAMES JOSHUA G. LIM
> Bachelor of Arts in Political Science
> Class of 2013, Ateneo de Manila University
> Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines
> 
> jamesjoshua...@yahoo.com | +63 (915) 321-7582
> Facebook/Twitter: akiestar | Wikimedia: Sky Harbor
> http://about.me/josh.lim
> 
> ___
> Wikimania-l mailing list
> wikimani...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-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] [Wikimania-l] Community consultation on the future of Wikimania

2015-12-03 Thread Austin Hair 
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Ellie Young  wrote:
> A lot of work has gone into preparing for  the consultation.It will be 
> going out December 14.  We are looking forward to getting everyone's feedback 
> in the weeks after and into early January.

Is there a particular reason it's being delayed until the 14th?

Austin

___
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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Lisa Gruwell 
We agree with you that WMF fundraising should not use stock photography.
This was a mistake by a designer.  We specify in our contracts with outside
designers that the images used should be custom artwork that WMF owns (and
can then share) or freely licensed images.  We pulled that banner yesterday
and asked our designers for a new custom image that we can freely license.
We are running another banner with a custom light bulb image at 100% now.
This artwork will be added to Commons.   We also have a few new banners
featuring some beautiful Commons images that are under development:   Stars

, Penguin

 Thank
you for pointing this out to us.



Best,

Lisa

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Rob  wrote:

> I don't think this rises to the level of outrage, but it's a little
> important.  The goal of the WMF should be to promote free and open
> content, and this adds to the perception that the WMF is disconnected
> from those goals and the community.  I don't care if they use a stock
> photo if they need to, but when they have smart, capable, and creative
> people like Victor Grigas on staff, they can certainly manage to
> photograph a cup of coffee and release it as a CC photo to set a good
> example for the community and movement.
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Gerard Meijssen
>  wrote:
> > Hoi,
> > It is that time of year where money is asked from the people. Arguably we
> > would do more when the Wikimedia foundation was not so FF-ing Wikipedia
> > centred.The arguments for not giving Wikisource have passed their sell by
> > date and usability for exposing its wonderful work is imho a
> disfigurement
> > on the resume of the WMF (among others). This is a cheap one to fix. It
> > makes sense to fix it as I understand sources are part of "Wikimedia
> Zero"
> > and it would make a world of a difference when the sources can actually
> be
> > found.
> >
> > Unicef among others has fundraising campaigns for education because it is
> > not its most important priority. As long as kids die because of lack of
> > food, safe water, preventable disease and temperature it is obvious why.
> > Such an excuse the WMF does not have. It could ask for additional funding
> > for Wikisource, for Wikidata for ... and it would have a solid argument.
> > Thanks,
> >   GerardM
> >
> > On 3 December 2015 at 10:25, Andrea Zanni 
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Pine W  wrote:
> >>
> >> > Under the redesigned grants scheme, WMF Project grants might be able
> to
> >> > help with this kind of software development work for Commons and/or
> >> > Wikisource. I happen to know a developer here in Cascadia who might be
> >> > interested, either as an individual or in association with a Wikimedia
> >> > affiliate, in doing this kind of work on a grant or contract basis.
> >> >
> >> > Pinging Kacie for comment about possible grant funding. (:
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Pine, thanks for the comment.
> >> I understand what you mean, and I do believe there is space to work on
> >> Wikisource via grants, BUT.
> >>
> >> But I already did a Individual Engagement Grant in 2013 (with David
> Cuenca)
> >> regarding Wikisource.
> >> It was great, but IEGs don't give you staff time. So me and David used
> >> Google Summer of Code, and we mentored 4 projects: if I'm not mistaken,
> >> only one was really finished, meaning it produced concrete results on
> >> Wikisource. Others stopped before (for example, two dedicated mediawiki
> >> extensions were not put in production). Within the IEG, we made a big
> >> survey among Wikisource communities, to develop a wishlist and a roadmap
> >> for WS communities. We set up a Wikisource Community User Group. We
> talked
> >> and talked. Bugs were and are reported, from years. Two weeks ago, we
> >> convened the very first internationl Wikisource conference, in Vienna,
> >> hosted by Wikimedia Austria (3 members from WMF were there, and we had a
> >> great and productive time, reports will follow).
> >>
> >> I've personally been involved in all of these efforts, so I've also seen
> >> that real impact of Wikisource infrastructure (core WS extension,
> design,
> >> interface, performance, development) has been minimal. I don't really
> want
> >> to have this conversation here and now, but I have had a fair amount of
> >> experience in this to say that until the WMF (or some affiliate big
> enough
> >> and high enough in the software pipeline) commit to WS, change won't
> >> magically happen by itself. We have practically one real volunteer
> >> developer, and he's full of work to do (also, I already asked him if he
> >> would like to receive a grant to work on certain issues, and he can't,
> and
> >> he's the only one who could do that, thanks to his unique

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread geni 
On 3 December 2015 at 19:29, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:

> We agree with you that WMF fundraising should not use stock photography.
> This was a mistake by a designer.
>

They made a mistake with a Getty image?

>We pulled that banner yesterday
>and asked our designers for a new custom image that we can freely license.

To clarify these are different designers? Messing with Getty is not
something you want to be doing.

-- 
geni
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Rob 
Excellent (and prompt) resolution, thank you!  We can all put down our
pitchforks now.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:
> We agree with you that WMF fundraising should not use stock photography.
> This was a mistake by a designer.  We specify in our contracts with outside
> designers that the images used should be custom artwork that WMF owns (and
> can then share) or freely licensed images.  We pulled that banner yesterday
> and asked our designers for a new custom image that we can freely license.
> We are running another banner with a custom light bulb image at 100% now.
> This artwork will be added to Commons.   We also have a few new banners
> featuring some beautiful Commons images that are under development:   Stars
> 
> , Penguin
> 
>  Thank
> you for pointing this out to us.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Lisa
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:58 AM, Rob  wrote:
>
>> I don't think this rises to the level of outrage, but it's a little
>> important.  The goal of the WMF should be to promote free and open
>> content, and this adds to the perception that the WMF is disconnected
>> from those goals and the community.  I don't care if they use a stock
>> photo if they need to, but when they have smart, capable, and creative
>> people like Victor Grigas on staff, they can certainly manage to
>> photograph a cup of coffee and release it as a CC photo to set a good
>> example for the community and movement.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Gerard Meijssen
>>  wrote:
>> > Hoi,
>> > It is that time of year where money is asked from the people. Arguably we
>> > would do more when the Wikimedia foundation was not so FF-ing Wikipedia
>> > centred.The arguments for not giving Wikisource have passed their sell by
>> > date and usability for exposing its wonderful work is imho a
>> disfigurement
>> > on the resume of the WMF (among others). This is a cheap one to fix. It
>> > makes sense to fix it as I understand sources are part of "Wikimedia
>> Zero"
>> > and it would make a world of a difference when the sources can actually
>> be
>> > found.
>> >
>> > Unicef among others has fundraising campaigns for education because it is
>> > not its most important priority. As long as kids die because of lack of
>> > food, safe water, preventable disease and temperature it is obvious why.
>> > Such an excuse the WMF does not have. It could ask for additional funding
>> > for Wikisource, for Wikidata for ... and it would have a solid argument.
>> > Thanks,
>> >   GerardM
>> >
>> > On 3 December 2015 at 10:25, Andrea Zanni 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Pine W  wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Under the redesigned grants scheme, WMF Project grants might be able
>> to
>> >> > help with this kind of software development work for Commons and/or
>> >> > Wikisource. I happen to know a developer here in Cascadia who might be
>> >> > interested, either as an individual or in association with a Wikimedia
>> >> > affiliate, in doing this kind of work on a grant or contract basis.
>> >> >
>> >> > Pinging Kacie for comment about possible grant funding. (:
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hi Pine, thanks for the comment.
>> >> I understand what you mean, and I do believe there is space to work on
>> >> Wikisource via grants, BUT.
>> >>
>> >> But I already did a Individual Engagement Grant in 2013 (with David
>> Cuenca)
>> >> regarding Wikisource.
>> >> It was great, but IEGs don't give you staff time. So me and David used
>> >> Google Summer of Code, and we mentored 4 projects: if I'm not mistaken,
>> >> only one was really finished, meaning it produced concrete results on
>> >> Wikisource. Others stopped before (for example, two dedicated mediawiki
>> >> extensions were not put in production). Within the IEG, we made a big
>> >> survey among Wikisource communities, to develop a wishlist and a roadmap
>> >> for WS communities. We set up a Wikisource Community User Group. We
>> talked
>> >> and talked. Bugs were and are reported, from years. Two weeks ago, we
>> >> convened the very first internationl Wikisource conference, in Vienna,
>> >> hosted by Wikimedia Austria (3 members from WMF were there, and we had a
>> >> great and productive time, reports will follow).
>> >>
>> >> I've personally been involved in all of these efforts, so I've also seen
>> >> that real impact of Wikisource infrastructure (core WS extension,
>> design,
>> >> interface, performance, development) has been minimal. I don't really
>> want
>> >> to have this conversation here and now, but I have had a fair amount of
>> >> experience in this to say that until the WMF (or some affiliate big
>> enough
>> >> and high enough in the software pipeline) commit to WS, change won't
>> >> magically

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Rob 
I don't think this rises to the level of outrage, but it's a little
important.  The goal of the WMF should be to promote free and open
content, and this adds to the perception that the WMF is disconnected
from those goals and the community.  I don't care if they use a stock
photo if they need to, but when they have smart, capable, and creative
people like Victor Grigas on staff, they can certainly manage to
photograph a cup of coffee and release it as a CC photo to set a good
example for the community and movement.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:41 AM, Gerard Meijssen
 wrote:
> Hoi,
> It is that time of year where money is asked from the people. Arguably we
> would do more when the Wikimedia foundation was not so FF-ing Wikipedia
> centred.The arguments for not giving Wikisource have passed their sell by
> date and usability for exposing its wonderful work is imho a disfigurement
> on the resume of the WMF (among others). This is a cheap one to fix. It
> makes sense to fix it as I understand sources are part of "Wikimedia Zero"
> and it would make a world of a difference when the sources can actually be
> found.
>
> Unicef among others has fundraising campaigns for education because it is
> not its most important priority. As long as kids die because of lack of
> food, safe water, preventable disease and temperature it is obvious why.
> Such an excuse the WMF does not have. It could ask for additional funding
> for Wikisource, for Wikidata for ... and it would have a solid argument.
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
>
> On 3 December 2015 at 10:25, Andrea Zanni  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 10:09 AM, Pine W  wrote:
>>
>> > Under the redesigned grants scheme, WMF Project grants might be able to
>> > help with this kind of software development work for Commons and/or
>> > Wikisource. I happen to know a developer here in Cascadia who might be
>> > interested, either as an individual or in association with a Wikimedia
>> > affiliate, in doing this kind of work on a grant or contract basis.
>> >
>> > Pinging Kacie for comment about possible grant funding. (:
>> >
>>
>>
>> Hi Pine, thanks for the comment.
>> I understand what you mean, and I do believe there is space to work on
>> Wikisource via grants, BUT.
>>
>> But I already did a Individual Engagement Grant in 2013 (with David Cuenca)
>> regarding Wikisource.
>> It was great, but IEGs don't give you staff time. So me and David used
>> Google Summer of Code, and we mentored 4 projects: if I'm not mistaken,
>> only one was really finished, meaning it produced concrete results on
>> Wikisource. Others stopped before (for example, two dedicated mediawiki
>> extensions were not put in production). Within the IEG, we made a big
>> survey among Wikisource communities, to develop a wishlist and a roadmap
>> for WS communities. We set up a Wikisource Community User Group. We talked
>> and talked. Bugs were and are reported, from years. Two weeks ago, we
>> convened the very first internationl Wikisource conference, in Vienna,
>> hosted by Wikimedia Austria (3 members from WMF were there, and we had a
>> great and productive time, reports will follow).
>>
>> I've personally been involved in all of these efforts, so I've also seen
>> that real impact of Wikisource infrastructure (core WS extension, design,
>> interface, performance, development) has been minimal. I don't really want
>> to have this conversation here and now, but I have had a fair amount of
>> experience in this to say that until the WMF (or some affiliate big enough
>> and high enough in the software pipeline) commit to WS, change won't
>> magically happen by itself. We have practically one real volunteer
>> developer, and he's full of work to do (also, I already asked him if he
>> would like to receive a grant to work on certain issues, and he can't, and
>> he's the only one who could do that, thanks to his unique experience).
>>
>> Grant works for little things, I'm afraid. Major change requires something
>> else.
>>
>> Aubrey
>> ___
>> 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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Bohdan Melnychuk 
That is not a small thing. That is an enormous thing. We show people 
some unfree image while propagating free stuff. Hypocrisy? We are 
speaking about thousands of people seeing it.


It is good that the stuff was removed, but from my point of view that 
another image with link to an external site rather than to Commons is 
still a very bad thing. It reminds me those games where ads are ways 
better than the game itself.


Commons must contain the images used to help funding projects one of 
which is Commons.


Another disturbing point indeed is WMF hiding on all these wikis like 
donatewiki, votewiki 
and 
similar where it freely violates its own licensing policy and where they 
are safe from the community.


It looks like WMF has some pleasure from spitting on some of the values 
which define it and which are very important for us. For me to look on 
these particular mentioned wikis, to see a bad abuse there and to be 
able to do nothing is very humiliating.


I just cannot imagine such things to be mistakes. If it after all is a 
mistake then it's systematical one and something with the organization 
is wrong. Wrong things are those which need fixes.


--Base

On 03.12.2015 23:49, Rob wrote:

I doubt the selection of a single image occupied that much staff time
and discussion.  No process is perfect. This is a small thing, that
was quickly fixed.  I doubt a lot of money was wasted here.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:11 PM, John Mark Vandenberg  wrote:

"On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:

We agree with you that WMF fundraising should not use stock photography.
This was a mistake by a designer.  We specify in our contracts with outside
designers that the images used should be custom artwork that WMF owns (and
can then share) or freely licensed images.

Someone needed to approve purchasing the stock photograph.  They are
not free...?  Was it WMF or Trilogy?
Even if it was Trilogy, WMF sanity check processes are also not
working.  Surely someone at WMF is responsible for QA of the images
used in fundraising?

https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles shows this stock
photograph was uploaded to donate.wikimedia.org many times, and worked
on by WMF staff members.

https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:10-coffee-txt-thepricekeepswikithriving.jpg
- SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:03-coffee-txt-goingallyear.jpg
- SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Newgreen.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greencoffeecup-alt.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greencoffeecup-4.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead-redcup.jpg
- SPatton (WMF) (marked as CC-BY-SA; is that legal with the Getty
Image?)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-3dollars.jpg -
RStearns (Trilogy)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-small.jpg -
RStearns (Trilogy)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-no-text.jpg -
BHouse (Trilogy)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-small.png -
RStearns (Trilogy)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-faites_v1.png - Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-offrez_v2.png - Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-offrez_v1.png - Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-oggi_offri_v2.png -
Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-oggi_offri_v1.png -
Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-dona_caffe_v2.png -
Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-dona_caffe_v1.png -
Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-en-donate_coffee_v2.png
- Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-en-donate_coffee_v1.png
- Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead.jpg -
BHouse (Trilogy)

Jseddon uploaded several alternative coffee cup photographs to
donate.wikimedia.org (no metadata, but they look like his own work...,
and not too shabby) . How did a stock photograph become selected over
other options, and ownership/copyright was never raised during those
selection discussions?

That is a lot of donor money wasted by someone somehow deciding to use
a Getty image as part of a multimillion dollor fundraising drive for
an organisation supporting "It is like a library or a public park. It
is like a temple for the mind. It is a place we can all go to think,
to learn, to share our knowledge with others."

I do hope your contract with the external design company allows you to
reclaim the wasted donor money caused by their violation of the
contract regarding image selection.

"We’ve worked hard over the years to keep it lean and tight. We
fulfill our mission, and leave waste to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] A moderator's Pleas

2015-12-03 Thread John Mark Vandenberg 
On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 8:35 PM, Richard Ames  wrote:
> All -
>
> Please use a new subject line when introducing a new topic.  Please start
> the thread with a new message (not a reply) to
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org

My apologies.  I have no idea how my email became a new thread without a subject

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-December/080111.html

It was supposed to be a reply to

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2015-December/080106.html

a bug in gmail web interface is the only likely cause :/

I suggest adding a rule to mailman to enforce a minimum number of
characters in the subject line; any number above 0 would have quite
rightly rejected my post ;-)

> More frequent posters: please consider the soft limit of 30 posts per
> month... see: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l

The wikimedia-l stats website appears to be broken, not showing months
after July 2015.

http://www.infodisiac.com/Wikipedia/ScanMail/Wikimedia-l.html

https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120294

-- 
John Vandenberg

___
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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread John Mark Vandenberg 
"On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:
> We agree with you that WMF fundraising should not use stock photography.
> This was a mistake by a designer.  We specify in our contracts with outside
> designers that the images used should be custom artwork that WMF owns (and
> can then share) or freely licensed images.

Someone needed to approve purchasing the stock photograph.  They are
not free...?  Was it WMF or Trilogy?
Even if it was Trilogy, WMF sanity check processes are also not
working.  Surely someone at WMF is responsible for QA of the images
used in fundraising?

https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles shows this stock
photograph was uploaded to donate.wikimedia.org many times, and worked
on by WMF staff members.

https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:10-coffee-txt-thepricekeepswikithriving.jpg
- SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:03-coffee-txt-goingallyear.jpg
- SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Newgreen.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greencoffeecup-alt.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greencoffeecup-4.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead-redcup.jpg
- SPatton (WMF) (marked as CC-BY-SA; is that legal with the Getty
Image?)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-3dollars.jpg -
RStearns (Trilogy)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-small.jpg -
RStearns (Trilogy)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-no-text.jpg -
BHouse (Trilogy)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-small.png -
RStearns (Trilogy)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-faites_v1.png - Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-offrez_v2.png - Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-offrez_v1.png - Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-oggi_offri_v2.png -
Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-oggi_offri_v1.png -
Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-dona_caffe_v2.png -
Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-dona_caffe_v1.png -
Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-en-donate_coffee_v2.png
- Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-en-donate_coffee_v1.png
- Jseddon (WMF)
https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead.jpg -
BHouse (Trilogy)

Jseddon uploaded several alternative coffee cup photographs to
donate.wikimedia.org (no metadata, but they look like his own work...,
and not too shabby) . How did a stock photograph become selected over
other options, and ownership/copyright was never raised during those
selection discussions?

That is a lot of donor money wasted by someone somehow deciding to use
a Getty image as part of a multimillion dollor fundraising drive for
an organisation supporting "It is like a library or a public park. It
is like a temple for the mind. It is a place we can all go to think,
to learn, to share our knowledge with others."

I do hope your contract with the external design company allows you to
reclaim the wasted donor money caused by their violation of the
contract regarding image selection.

"We’ve worked hard over the years to keep it lean and tight. We
fulfill our mission, and leave waste to others."

> We pulled that banner yesterday

Thank you.

> and asked our designers for a new custom image that we can freely license.

Why not use the Coffee SVG I found (very easily I must say)?

> We are running another banner with a custom light bulb image at 100% now.
> This artwork will be added to Commons.

IMO they should be uploaded to Commons first, with full metadata, and
create a workflow added around begging the Commons community to
prioritise checking these images quickly so they can be used in the
fundraiser.  That was how it was done before donate.wikimedia.org ,
when wikimediafoundation.org was used for these uploads, and that wiki
had a significant volunteer community assisting in maintenance.

Uploads to donate.wikimedia.org should either be limited to people
competent in copyright and responsible for that aspect, or at the very
least the upload forms should require that metadata is filled in, and
someone at WMF checks new additions regularly.

--
John Vandenberg

___
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] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Rob 
I doubt the selection of a single image occupied that much staff time
and discussion.  No process is perfect. This is a small thing, that
was quickly fixed.  I doubt a lot of money was wasted here.

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:11 PM, John Mark Vandenberg  wrote:
> "On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Lisa Gruwell  wrote:
>> We agree with you that WMF fundraising should not use stock photography.
>> This was a mistake by a designer.  We specify in our contracts with outside
>> designers that the images used should be custom artwork that WMF owns (and
>> can then share) or freely licensed images.
>
> Someone needed to approve purchasing the stock photograph.  They are
> not free...?  Was it WMF or Trilogy?
> Even if it was Trilogy, WMF sanity check processes are also not
> working.  Surely someone at WMF is responsible for QA of the images
> used in fundraising?
>
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles shows this stock
> photograph was uploaded to donate.wikimedia.org many times, and worked
> on by WMF staff members.
>
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:10-coffee-txt-thepricekeepswikithriving.jpg
> - SPatton (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:03-coffee-txt-goingallyear.jpg
> - SPatton (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Newgreen.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greencoffeecup-alt.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greencoffeecup-4.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead-redcup.jpg
> - SPatton (WMF) (marked as CC-BY-SA; is that legal with the Getty
> Image?)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-3dollars.jpg -
> RStearns (Trilogy)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-small.jpg -
> RStearns (Trilogy)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-no-text.jpg -
> BHouse (Trilogy)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-small.png -
> RStearns (Trilogy)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-faites_v1.png - Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-offrez_v2.png - Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-offrez_v1.png - Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-oggi_offri_v2.png -
> Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-oggi_offri_v1.png -
> Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-dona_caffe_v2.png -
> Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-dona_caffe_v1.png -
> Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-en-donate_coffee_v2.png
> - Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-en-donate_coffee_v1.png
> - Jseddon (WMF)
> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead.jpg -
> BHouse (Trilogy)
>
> Jseddon uploaded several alternative coffee cup photographs to
> donate.wikimedia.org (no metadata, but they look like his own work...,
> and not too shabby) . How did a stock photograph become selected over
> other options, and ownership/copyright was never raised during those
> selection discussions?
>
> That is a lot of donor money wasted by someone somehow deciding to use
> a Getty image as part of a multimillion dollor fundraising drive for
> an organisation supporting "It is like a library or a public park. It
> is like a temple for the mind. It is a place we can all go to think,
> to learn, to share our knowledge with others."
>
> I do hope your contract with the external design company allows you to
> reclaim the wasted donor money caused by their violation of the
> contract regarding image selection.
>
> "We’ve worked hard over the years to keep it lean and tight. We
> fulfill our mission, and leave waste to others."
>
>> We pulled that banner yesterday
>
> Thank you.
>
>> and asked our designers for a new custom image that we can freely license.
>
> Why not use the Coffee SVG I found (very easily I must say)?
>
>> We are running another banner with a custom light bulb image at 100% now.
>> This artwork will be added to Commons.
>
> IMO they should be uploaded to Commons first, with full metadata, and
> create a workflow added around begging the Commons community to
> prioritise checking these images quickly so they can be used in the
> fundraiser.  That was how it was done before donate.wikimedia.org ,
> when wikimediafoundation.org was used for these uploads, and that wiki
> had a significant volunteer community assisting in maintenance.
>
> Uploads to donate.wikimedia.org should either be limited to people
> competent in copyright and responsible for that aspect, or at the very
> least the upload forms should require that metadata is filled in, and
> someone at WMF checks new additions regularly.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread geni 
On 3 December 2015 at 23:30, Rob  wrote:

>
> It was a photo of a cup of coffee.  It was a mistake that was quickly
> acknowledged and corrected.  Let's keep things in perspective, please.
>

It was a Getty image on one of the most high profile sites on the web.
Legal doesn't need the extra workload.

-- 
geni
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread Gnangarra 
hold it, back up the truck for a moment

If the WMF has a fundraising team and a PR/media team why is it paying a
third party to provide the banners surely someone should be able to design
them in house, what about someone from the design teams working on other
projects.   If no one has the skills to layout a banner why not ask the
community for some options there are many skilled volunteers that would
gladly do it for free, the WMF could even offer a scholarship to Wikimania
as an incentive to get it done within a short time frame.



On 4 December 2015 at 07:11, Bohdan Melnychuk  wrote:

> That is not a small thing. That is an enormous thing. We show people some
> unfree image while propagating free stuff. Hypocrisy? We are speaking about
> thousands of people seeing it.
>
> It is good that the stuff was removed, but from my point of view that
> another image with link to an external site rather than to Commons is still
> a very bad thing. It reminds me those games where ads are ways better than
> the game itself.
>
> Commons must contain the images used to help funding projects one of which
> is Commons.
>
> Another disturbing point indeed is WMF hiding on all these wikis like
> donatewiki, votewiki <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Forum/Archives/2015-06#License_policy_abuse_on_votewiki>and
> similar where it freely violates its own licensing policy and where they
> are safe from the community.
>
> It looks like WMF has some pleasure from spitting on some of the values
> which define it and which are very important for us. For me to look on
> these particular mentioned wikis, to see a bad abuse there and to be able
> to do nothing is very humiliating.
>
> I just cannot imagine such things to be mistakes. If it after all is a
> mistake then it's systematical one and something with the organization is
> wrong. Wrong things are those which need fixes.
>
> --Base
>
>
> On 03.12.2015 23:49, Rob wrote:
>
>> I doubt the selection of a single image occupied that much staff time
>> and discussion.  No process is perfect. This is a small thing, that
>> was quickly fixed.  I doubt a lot of money was wasted here.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 4:11 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:29 AM, Lisa Gruwell 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 We agree with you that WMF fundraising should not use stock photography.
 This was a mistake by a designer.  We specify in our contracts with
 outside
 designers that the images used should be custom artwork that WMF owns
 (and
 can then share) or freely licensed images.

>>> Someone needed to approve purchasing the stock photograph.  They are
>>> not free...?  Was it WMF or Trilogy?
>>> Even if it was Trilogy, WMF sanity check processes are also not
>>> working.  Surely someone at WMF is responsible for QA of the images
>>> used in fundraising?
>>>
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles shows this stock
>>> photograph was uploaded to donate.wikimedia.org many times, and worked
>>> on by WMF staff members.
>>>
>>>
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:10-coffee-txt-thepricekeepswikithriving.jpg
>>> - SPatton (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:03-coffee-txt-goingallyear.jpg
>>> - SPatton (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Newgreen.jpg - SPatton (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greencoffeecup-alt.jpg - SPatton
>>> (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Greencoffeecup-4.jpg - SPatton
>>> (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead-redcup.jpg
>>> - SPatton (WMF) (marked as CC-BY-SA; is that legal with the Getty
>>> Image?)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-3dollars.jpg -
>>> RStearns (Trilogy)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-small.jpg -
>>> RStearns (Trilogy)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-no-text.jpg -
>>> BHouse (Trilogy)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-overhead-small.png -
>>> RStearns (Trilogy)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-faites_v1.png -
>>> Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-offrez_v2.png -
>>> Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-fr-offrez_v1.png -
>>> Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-oggi_offri_v2.png -
>>> Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-oggi_offri_v1.png -
>>> Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-dona_caffe_v2.png -
>>> Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-it-dona_caffe_v1.png -
>>> Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-en-donate_coffee_v2.png
>>> - Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-en-donate_coffee_v1.png
>>> - Jseddon (WMF)
>>> https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Coffee-price-overhead.jpg -
>>> BHouse

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread geni 
On 3 December 2015 at 23:29, Gnangarra  wrote:

> hold it, back up the truck for a moment
>
> If the WMF has a fundraising team and a PR/media team why is it paying a
> third party to provide the banners surely someone should be able to design
> them in house, what about someone from the design teams working on other
> projects.   If no one has the skills to layout a banner why not ask the
> community for some options there are many skilled volunteers that would
> gladly do it for free, the WMF could even offer a scholarship to Wikimania
> as an incentive to get it done within a short time frame.
>
>
Graphic design is really one of those things better left to professionals.
Equally for a handful of banners going externally rather than employing
someone full time makes sense. Admittedly the WMF hasn't had the best of
luck with its external contractors (wikipedia forever, this) but in
principle it is a valid approach.


-- 
geni
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] (no subject)

2015-12-03 Thread MZMcBride 
Rob wrote:
>It was a photo of a cup of coffee.  It was a mistake that was quickly
>acknowledged and corrected.  Let's keep things in perspective, please.

Agreed. I'd much rather see focus put on Liam's e-mail about the general
fund-raising problem, the current solution to which is deploying overly
large advertisements on Wikipedia in a few rich countries for several
weeks. If we're willing to donate the entire screen space to an ad for the
Wikimedia Foundation, it probably makes sense to at least reconsider
whether a smaller, less obtrusive paid ad for a company or organization
would be better. I imagine many companies and organizations would be
willing to pay a premium for a much smaller ad slot, given Wikipedia's
level of traffic and the limited supply of ad space that we'd likely be
willing to sell. At what point is having horribly large and intrusive ads
worse than having much smaller and faster paid ad campaigns?

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,

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: Invitation to WMF November 2015 Metrics & Activities Meeting: Thursday, December 3, 19:00 UTC

2015-12-03 Thread Praveena Maharaj 
REMINDER: This meeting starts in 30 minutes.

-- Forwarded message --
From: Praveena Maharaj 
Date: Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:02 PM
Subject: Invitation to WMF November 2015 Metrics & Activities Meeting:
Thursday, December 3, 19:00 UTC
To: wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org


Dear all,

The next WMF metrics and activities meeting will take place on Thursday,
December 3, 2015, at 7:00 PM UTC (11 AM PST). The IRC channel is
#wikimedia-office on irc.freenode.net, and the meeting will be broadcast as
a live YouTube stream.

Meeting agenda:

* Welcomes

* Strategy update

* Community update

* Research showcase

** The impact of the Teahouse on user retention

* Product demo

* Questions/discussions

Please review
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings for further
information about the meeting and how to participate.

We’ll post the video recording publicly after the meeting.

Thank you,
Praveena

-- 

Praveena Maharaj
Executive Assistant to the VP of Product
Wikimedia Foundation \\ www.wikimediafoundation.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,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fundraising banner (again)

2015-12-03 Thread rupert THURNER 
One feedback I got today is to not display the banner any more if the
person donated.
On Dec 3, 2015 16:37, "Liam Wyatt"  wrote:

> TL;DR - we've reached "peak banner", how do we change the fundraising
> model to be about working smarter, not just pushing harder. This needs
> to be part of a broader process that involves strategic planning
> transparency, endowment discussions, editor-recruitment, etc. Not just
> about fullscreen advertising.
>
> I, along with many here, am dismayed that the banners are now at the
> stage of being fullscreen. However, as others have mentioned, the
> actual text of the request has been adjusted following a reasonably
> collaborative process to identify text that is both effective and
> acceptable to the community. Also, the fundraising team have been
> placed in the difficult position of being told to raise a LOT more
> money without being given more methods to do so.[1] Naturally then,
> there is a point where the existing methods reach their maximum
> effectiveness, and capacity is stretched to the point where awkward
> mistakes happen.[2]
>
> At this point, I suspect we've reached "peak banner".
>
> Rather like "peak oil" - after drilling the same oil reserve for a
> long time, you have to pump exponentially harder to maintain a steady
> flow.[2] Furthermore, the harder you pump today, the more difficult it
> will be tomorrow. I think we've reached that point with the
> fundraising advertising and emails. We know that the donation amounts
> are decreasing, but the budget is increasing. There are many suggested
> reasons for the decreased supply (relevant parables for this include
> "killing the goose that laid the golden egg" and "the boy who cried
> wolf"). So it's now time to talk about pumping smarter, not harder.
>
> An important part of that shift is the recently-opened (but longtime
> mooted) discussion about an endowment. I commend Lisa's essay[3] as an
> excellent start to formulating a long-term plan. There are many
> important questions that would need to be answered as part of that
> strategy. People interested in this really ought to read her thoughts
> on creating a "growing endowment" and the advantages/challenges this
> would bring. Carefully and consultatively addressing the challenges in
> creating an endowment would also go a long way towards fixing other
> related concerns:
>
> - Improving the transparency of the WMF strategy and the way decisions
> are made (see also the discussion about the FDC recommendations[4])
> - Having the global community, especially the Chapters which have
> local fundraising capacity, involved in the fundraising process -
> rather than being held at arms length. The community should be seen as
> the fundraiser's biggest asset, not the pageview numbers.
> - culturally sensitive communication (to avoid things like the email
> saying "let's end this" being translated into French as the
> *equivalent* of "I challenge you to a fight to the death")
> - Integrating the activities of fundraising as "part of the movement"
> rather than as something that is held/holds itself apart. The WMF
> donor database, for example, has tens of thousands of people who would
> be interested in learning to edit. Why have we never tried to create a
> [privacy-policy-compliant] way of introducing those people to their
> local communities/chapters to help address the other strategic
> challenge of "editor recruitment and retention".
> - Addressing some of the inequities of how money is
> raised/disseminated across our movement which are based on rules
> "grandfathered in" from chapter-fundraising rules prior to the "Haifa
> letter".
> - movement calendars (to avoid things like this year's fundraising
> clash with WikiLovesMonuments)
>
> Some people say that the fundraising goal is too high. Perhaps, but we
> also have a long list of fixes-needed and wanted-features. We can't do
> a lot more with a lot less, although we can certainly increase the
> efficiency/transparency of how the existing WMF budget is spent!
> However, with the increased total budget, also comes a increased
> expectation of results. I think that a lot of my own frustration comes
> from this - I could probably be supportive of a fullscreen banner IF I
> felt the results justified it. But, for just one example, as Andrea
> described today[5], Wikisource has NEVER received any dedicated
> support despite years of that community begging for it.
>
> I've probably written too much now... sorry!
>
> -Liam
>
> [1] Side note: If you'd like to apply for what is think is probably
> the hardest (and therefore very important) job in Wikimedia, WMF
> Fundraising is hiring a community-liaison role:
> https://boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/113040?t=26r71l
> [2] like saying "A year ago, you gave 0.00 € to keep Wikipedia online
> and ad-free." https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120214
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil Yes, I realise the metaphor
> isn't perfect.