[Wikimedia-l] November SWAN call (2021-11-27 to 28)

[Andrew Lih]

Hi all, just a reminder that we will be having our monthly SWAN (Strategic
Wikimedia Affiliates Network) calls this coming weekend, with three major
topics:

* "The Future of Wikimedia Governance" document by Wikimedia Deutschland
lays out some possible scenarios for the future. Presenting: Nicole Ebber.
* Hubs. Reflecting on the Hubs Workshop November 27 event, and a proposal
for a Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Hub. Presenting: Camelia Boban.
* Movement Charter Drafting Committee. An update on the status, and how
might SWAN be helpful in the drafting process.

Call 1 - 03:00 UTC – 2021-11-28 (Asia-Pacific friendly time)
Call 2 - 18:00 UTC – 2021-11-28 (Europe-Africa-Americas friendly time)

All are welcome: You do not need to be in an affiliate to participate in
the calls. Learn about SWAN, review the agenda items, sign up and find the
meeting link at the following meta page:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Wikimedia_Affiliates_Network

-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ERDSIXIB2QRXRJIP2WVJ2OK3JWEHGRAI/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement Charter Drafting Committee elections are now open!

[Andrew Lih]

On Fri, Oct 15, 2021 at 5:44 PM Mike Peel  wrote:

> Both of these seem like a fantastic way to support your intrinsic biases.
>

That's a pretty grim way of looking at things. I could find a bigger
problem with the fact that the main page has images of the candidates, of
varying quality, aspect ratio, etc. with no attempt for normalization. The
effect of candidate presentation on voter preference is a highly studied
area in psychology and political science which should give us a lot more
pause than the side effects of either of these tools.[1]

Both of these tools allow one to cluster and examine the data in a
structured form. It doesn't prescribe or afford any type of interpretation.
As both of us are heavily into Wikidata, how is this different than
returning the value of a SPARQL query and relying on the user to be smart
about using the output?

The alternative to having these sense-making tools is scrolling down a page
with 70+ candidates trying to track five different parameters in one's
brain, by relying only on memory. Or giving up and reverting to voting for
those you recognize as friends. I don't think that's a good state of
affairs.

-Andrew

[1] - An issue I raised back in July 2021 -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:WMF_elections_candidate/2021/candidates
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
Public archives at 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/3A6R5PA4PEG4S6DQCRYXY2JAGTLY2Q2Y/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Movement Charter Drafting Committee elections are now open!

[Andrew Lih]

To echo Risker, I'd encourage the use of more advanced tools by voters. On
meta, I've pointed to the two tools that hopefully help:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Drafting_Committee/Elections#Tools_for_examining_candidates

The links point to:
- A table of all the factual information supplied by the candidates in a
wiki table, in which each column is sortable.
- A browsable interface to all the compass questions and responses,
providing much better candidate comparisons. An issue Adam brought up is
that there may not be a good understanding of the variance in the answers
of candidates. For that reason, this tool is valuable in showing that the
following questions had the most diverse responses and are likely to be the
most useful for voters to examine directly.

6 - limit the role of WMF to "keep the servers running"
11 - democratic governance structure
20 - new forms of knowledge representation
24 - regional elections
27 - "counter-voice"
45 - "percentage of movement money" to be allocated
92 - ratification from all

I'd encourage voters to experiment with these tools.

-Andrew

On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 9:39 AM Risker  wrote:

> Adam, you may find the tool discussed here
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter/Drafting_Committee/Candidates#Candidates_Compass:_One_statement,_all_answers>
> to be helpful.  It is created by one of the candidates, is based on the
> information submitted by candidates for the election compass, and is quite
> visual.  (Disclosure: I am also a candidate.)
>
> I'd also suggest that the written answers illustrate the differences
> between candidates a little more specifically than the general five-point
> compass.  Perhaps, also, part of the reason that there's some consensus
> amongst candidates (at least on the surface) is that they could be
> representative of a pretty broad consensus throughout the global community
> on some points.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 at 09:26, Adam Wight  wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 12:02 PM Kaarel Vaidla 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Additionally, we are piloting a so-called “Election Compass
>>> <https://mcdc-election-compass.toolforge.org/>” for this election.
>>> Click yourself through the tool and respond to the 19 statements, and you
>>> will see which candidate is closest to you!
>>>
>>
>> Hi, thank you for facilitating this process and for sharing the
>> interesting "election compass" experiment.  After trying the tool, I urge
>> you to take it offline.  Its algorithm is opaque, and in my opinion very
>> unlikely to give a helpful result.  It's explicitly meant to influence how
>> we vote, but without us having done any validation of what it's actually
>> calculating.  If you want to test this tool, you could position it as an
>> "exit poll", to compare the tool's results with how each person actually
>> voted, or you could turn off the "alignment" scoring.
>>
>> My suspicions started with the fact that I answered "strongly support" or
>> "support" to almost every question, which suggests that the axes were not
>> chosen in a way that differentiates between the candidates.  Instead, it
>> seems like it's going to amplify tiny differences like "strongly" vs
>> "support"—is this true?
>>
>> Was the tool analyzed with this sort of concern in mind?  Are there
>> reasons to believe that the "alignment" scores are meaningful in our
>> scenario?
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Adam Wight
>> [[mw:User:Adamw]]
>> Writing in my volunteer capacity.
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
>> Public archives at
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/ORUIO7XSLVBBW57GIVPG53LJA3CIBNDG/
>> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
>
> _______
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> Public archives at
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/KKNSAX5FKNUYRRKIZQJZP4OAURUN2JZ5/
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org



-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foun

[Wikimedia-l] Open for signing on Meta - Community open letter on renaming

[Andrew Lih]

Dear all,

There is currently a community open letter on renaming [[m:COLOR]] that
requests a pause to renaming activities being pursued by the Wikimedia
Foundation 2030 Brand Project. The open letter focuses on concerns about
the process and not about specific naming choices.

Individual editors and affiliates (via their designated representative) can
sign with their logged-in account to show support.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_open_letter_on_renaming

Coming up: There is currently a branding survey that runs until July 7
(link below). There is concern that the consultation process and options on
the survey do not adequately reflect community sentiment, given the effect
name changes for the foundation and movement would have. This was a major
motivation for the open letter.


Thanks go out to more than 70 participants from Wikimedia affiliates who
took part in our recent meetings to discuss the brand project issue. The
result was more than a dozen editors who help create the open letter.


With 50 major chapters and affiliates and 600+ individuals signing the
statement, we are seeing great interest in this issue.

Regards,

-Andrew (User:Fuzheado)


LINKS:

Community Open Letter on Renaming (COLOR)  on meta:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_open_letter_on_renaming

2030 Brand Project main page:

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project

Brand survey for individuals:

https://wikimedia.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9G2dN7P0T7gPqpD

(If there are options you would like to highlight outside of the three
provided, it is possible to write in your own options and views at the end
of the survey)

Brand survey for affiliates:

A link should have been sent to the affiliate liaisons or affiliate
contacts. If you have not received any correspondence, please contact Essie
Zar (ezar -at- wikimedia.org) of WMF.

English Wikipedia Signpost article about the issue and a Q interview with
the document writers and collaborators:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-06-28/Interview
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimania-l] [Covid-19] Postponing Wikimania Bangkok until 2021

[Andrew Lih]

w we do it, will
> > make
> > > a meaningful impact on the world. We are so grateful for all that you
> do
> > as
> > > a movement to continue to rise to the challenges of our moment.
> > >
> > > Please, stay safe and take care.
> > >
> > > Katherine, on behalf of the:
> > >
> > >- ESEAP Core Organizing Team
> > >- Wikimania Steering Committee
> > >- Wikimedia Foundation Events Team
> > >
> > > P.S. You can help translate and share this message via Meta-Wiki: <
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2020>
> > > You can also find additional information about Wikimedia's other
> actions
> > > regarding COVID-19 on Meta-Wiki:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/COVID-19
> > >
> > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2020
> > > [2] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2020:Organizers
> > > [3] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2020:Venue
> > > [4] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarship_Committee
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Katherine Maher (she/her)
> > >
> > > Executive Director
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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 and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Movement Strategy: Recommendations released, join the conversation

[Andrew Lih]

ovement/2018-20/Recommendations/Process
> [8]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_is_the_timeframe_for_all_of_this
> ?
> [9]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Overview/Timeline
> [10]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions
>
> --
>
> Katherine Maher (she/her)
>
> Executive Director
>
> Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Movement Strategy: Recommendations released, join the conversation

[Andrew Lih]

ove us
> > > towards discussions around implementation.
> > >
> > > You will find more information about the process in the FAQs [10], and
> > > please direct any additional questions or remarks to the respective
> meta
> > > pages.
> > >
> > > Our movement is the sum of its parts. Each member brings to it
> invaluable
> > > skills, expertise, and ideas to capture, collect, and share free
> > knowledge.
> > > And every single contribution made by every community member from the
> > > beginning has helped us grow into the global, diverse, and unique
> > movement
> > > we are today.
> > >
> > > I am honored to share this on behalf of everyone involved, and am
> looking
> > > forward to insights from across the movement over the next few weeks.
> > >
> > > Katherine
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups
> > > [3]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People#Second_phase
> > > [4]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People/Community_Strategy_Liaisons
> > > [5]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Principles
> > > [6]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Cover_note
> > > [7]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations/Process
> > > [8]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_is_the_timeframe_for_all_of_this
> > > ?
> > > [9]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Overview/Timeline
> > > [10]
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Katherine Maher (she/her)
> > >
> > > Executive Director
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: 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 and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Sep 12, 2019 at 2:42 PM Ad Huikeshoven  wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> There has already been an extensive consultation in the first half year of
> 2019. Zack presented the outcome to the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia
> Foundation August 14th in Stockholm. Het got a go for a next phase. The
> current dialogue is about implementation details, as far as I understand
> the status of the current process.
>

Yes, but perhaps what folks may miss is that there is a fundamental
disconnect between the numbers as presented earlier in this thread versus
what has been seen in various forums and discussions.

To wit: one figure that is less than 1% and one that is much much greater
than 50%, both of which are trying to measure the same sentiment. That
should give us all pause about how legitimate the next steps may be,
regardless of which side one is on.

On-wiki discussion of this:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACommunications%2FWikimedia_brands%2F2030_research_and_planning%2Fcommunity_review%2Fresults=revision=19372447=19372300

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community feedback and next steps on movement brand proposal

[Andrew Lih]

>>>>> This design process will be guided by a “brand network” – a group
> >>> of
> >>>>>>> volunteers who would like to continue advising on brand during this
> >>>>>>> consultation. Dozens of people have already volunteered, and we
> >>> invite
> >>>>>> you
> >>>>>>> to join the group. We will use a group on Wikimedia Space to host
> >>> this
> >>>>>>> discussion and the group will be closed to allow candid
> >>> discussions and
> >>>>>>> room for iterations. EVERYONE IS INVITED TO JOIN [3]. If you do not
> >>>>> want
> >>>>>> to
> >>>>>>> commit to the in-depth, longer term discussions that will be
> >>> happening
> >>>>>>> within the brand network group, we will still be tracking comments
> >>> left
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>>> the project’s Meta-Wiki page [4]. Furthermore, all important ideas
> >>> and
> >>>>>>> updates originating from the brand network discussion will be
> >>> shared
> >>>>>>> publicly to mailing lists and Meta-Wiki.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> The development of this proposed identity system will take
> >>>>> approximately
> >>>>>> 6
> >>>>>>> months. As stated, regular updates will be shared to mailing lists,
> >>>>>>> Wikimedia Space, and Meta-Wiki [4]. Please engage us where you are
> >>> most
> >>>>>>> comfortable! Once complete, community groups will have the power to
> >>>>>> decide
> >>>>>>> if/when they opt in to using the new system.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yours,
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Zack
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [1]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2019/02/26/leading-with-wikipedia-a-brand-proposal-for-2030/
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [2]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning/community_review/results
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [3] https://discuss-space.wmflabs.org/g/brand-network and click
> >>> the
> >>>>> gray
> >>>>>>> "Request" button. When your request is approved, you will be able
> >>> to
> >>>>> see
> >>>>>>> and access the brand network discussion category on the Discuss
> >>> Space
> >>>>>> main
> >>>>>>> page.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> [4]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_research_and_planning
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Zack McCune (he/him)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Director of Brand
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
> >>>>>>> ___
> >>>>>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> >>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >>>>>>> New messages to: 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 and
> >>>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >>>>>> New messages to: 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 and
> >>>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >>>>> New messages to: 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 and
> >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >>>> New messages to: 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 and
> >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >>> New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> >> New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Be the change you want to see (was: WMF commitment for a Wikimedia projects archive)

[Andrew Lih]

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:40 PM Dariusz Jemielniak 
wrote:

> Likewise. I often refrain from commenting when I think it is more
> collaborative and peaceful to do so, though.
>
> dj "pundit"
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 6:00 PM James Heilman  jmh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> As I trustee, I read and generally find this mailing list useful.


On the other hand, I'm sure you know quite well that this list is not great
at representing a broad cross-section of the movement or its core areas of
activity. Over time, the list dynamic has either caused folks to ignore it
or failed to attract subscribers.

I'm not a fan of depending on external modes of communication (non-open or
on for-profit products with dubious ethics) over our traditional channels.
However, it is clear that platforms like Telegram and Facebook have allowed
for community engagement at a speed, depth, richness and quality we have
never seen before. This is especially true when it comes to on-boarding new
external partners or appearing in the feed of people using social media.

James - You're on the Community Health Working Group for 2030 Strategy. I
hope your team can address this in some significant way.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

[Andrew Lih]

solution
> is,
> > > it probably passes by that.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga  escreveu no dia
> > segunda,
> > > 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
> > >
> > > > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing.
> And
> > > > maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
> > here.
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
>
> --
> Samuel Klein  @metasj  w:user:sj  +1 617 529 4266
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Dispute between Common and Outreach

[Andrew Lih]

On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 3:03 AM Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> The precautionary principle is labelled as an official policy of Commons.
> I think it should be mentioned on the assume good faith page as it explains
> why it is sometimes impractical to assume good faith to the extent of
> allowing  content to remain. If not mentioned, it can lead to severe
> disappointment and surprise. It should be made very clear to anyone who
> uploads that this policy may be applied, and why it is necessary. It would
> also be useful to explain what to do if it is applied where it should not
> be applied, whether from lack of evidence or for any other reason, and how
> to avoid the problem.
> It might even be advisable to state this policy clearly in the upload
> wizard. When people have been reasonably warned, they are less likely to be
> offended.
>

Exactly this.

Commons veterans are annoyed that uploaders don't understand all the
principles and rules of Commons.

So to be helpful, I go into Commons:AGF to add the precautionary principle.

This way, people like Galder and students will know that: "where there is
significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file, it should be
deleted"

My attempt to help is then reverted. Twice. Then I get threatened that I
will be blocked if I try to help give better instructions.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fuzheado=349936173=345797075

Tell me then, which is it going to be?

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

[Andrew Lih]

Oh the irony!

You assumed bad faith on my good faith edit to [[Commons:Assume good
faith]].

What would you consider "dishonest" about the edits or the summaries?
Telling folks that the [[Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle]] is
part of the policy dynamic that even experienced Wikipedians may not know
about (I certainly didn't) is most certainly useful.

That people are reverting the edits, in what seems to be an attempt to
either hide the precautionary principle or obfuscate it seems quite odd.
I'm assuming good faith here, so I'm not ascribing any motives to these
reverts. You did not even give any reason for your revert, whereas I did in
fact leave edit summaries.

For reference:

Edit 1 - "add precautionary principle"
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith=prev=349110161

Reverted by Yann with no comment.

Edit 2 - "refine wording"
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith=prev=349650525

Reverted by Colin with "Nothing to do with AFG [sic] and certainly not
"refine wording" -- dishonest edit summary"

I changed "should be deleted" to "may be deleted" in case that was the
wording someone had issue with. That's why the edit summary said "refine
wording."

-Andrew




On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 12:10 AM Yann Forget  wrote:

> This was reverted. It is a dishonest edit with a misleading summary.
>
> Regards,
> Yann
> Jai Jagat 2020 Grand March Coordinator
> https://www.jaijagat2020.org/
> +91-74 34 93 33 58 (also WhatsApp)
>
>
>
> Le dim. 12 mai 2019 à 19:59, Andrew Lih  a écrit :
>
> > This episode exposes a policy of Commons that may be unknown to many
> folks
> > - the precautionary principle.
> >
> > It is an explicit exception to assuming good faith, so I noted this on
> the
> > AGF page on Commons.
> >
> >
> >
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Assume_good_faith=prev=349650525
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 10:23 AM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
> > galder...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > As I am the author of the post, some remarks:
> > >
> > >   *   Commons is, indeed, the only [cloud] storage for file in most of
> > the
> > > Wikipedias. Making an accusation of using Commons as a storage place is
> > > unfair and nonsense.
> > >   *   Communication could be better, of course, but we don't have to
> > think
> > > on experienced editors and wikimedians, but on people we are trying to
> > > convince to upload to the Commons and find this burden. They don't know
> > how
> > > to communicate and why they must do it.
> > >   *   The upload system allow you to upload something if you are the
> > > author. Period.
> > >   *   Claiming that something is a derivative work without saying which
> > is
> > > the original work is not a good practice.
> > >   *   Of course, commons volunteers are few, and they have a great
> > > job-queue. But outreach volunteers are less, and a project like this
> can
> > > take a whole year of volunteer work.
> > >   *   After all the victim-blaming seen on this discussion no one was
> > able
> > > to point to a page where the procedure was clear for everyone.
> > >
> > > Let's hope we can follow with this project next year and we will have
> > less
> > > problems.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > >
> > > Galder
> > > 
> > > From: Wikimedia-l  on behalf
> of
> > > Vi to 
> > > Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2019 3:35 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
> > >
> > > I wonder wheter local sysops could be allowed to delete/undelete images
> > on
> > > commons in order to reduce workload. Most risky commons' uploads come
> > from
> > > cw-upload, allow local sysops to handle them could work.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > Il giorno dom 12 mag 2019 alle ore 15:31 James Heilman <
> jmh...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > ha scritto:
> > >
> > > > It is hard to get the admin bit there aswell. Is Commons interested
> in
> > > > having more admins?
> > > >
> > > > James
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, May 12, 2019 at 5:41 AM Fæ  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A couple of years ago a proposed project was for the WMF to pay for
> > > > > access to the Google 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach

[Andrew Lih]

re copyright violations.  But some rather
> > odd
> > > > > > remarks
> > > > > > >> were made "Commons has to fight the endless stream of uploaded
> > > > > > copyrighted
> > > > > > >> content on behalf of a headquarters in San Francisco that
> > doesn't
> > > > > care."
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> "you have regarded Commons as little more than free cloud
> > storage
> > > for
> > > > > > >> images you intend to use on Wikipedia ".
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Perhaps the Foundation needs to resolve this dispute?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Thrapostibongles
> > > > > > >> ___
> > > > > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > >> Unsubscribe:
> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > > > ,
> > > > > > >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > > > > > > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > > > > > > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > > > > > > ___
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Amir (he/him)
> > > > ___
> > > fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
> > MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

[Andrew Lih]

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 12:24 PM Samuel Klein  wrote:

> I see no reason to shut down projects, nor to tell participants to stop
> collaborating on X in the spirit of a Wiki.
>

Unfortunately, in theory, projects in zombie mode should not pose a problem
on their own.

In practice, they do affect our guidance to users in other projects and
often results in poor, contradictory or confusing advice. At least in
English Wikipedia, Wikinews keeps being referred to as a legitimate place
to steer people, either out of aspirational hope or ignorance of just how
dormant Wikinews is. Just peruse the Wikinews Recent Changes log, and on
most any given day you're hard pressed to find any meaningful edits. The
bulk of the changes are automated talk page additions, spam blocking, or
maintenance edits.

On the English WP:NOT page, we are serving users poorly by promoting the
fantasy that it is a legit companion to Wikipedia when we know it is not
the case.

In the spirit of comity, we tend not to detail the hard truths about the
deficiency of projects. (Actually we don't really have good ways to put
anything in review or probationary status.) Instead, when well-meaning
editors try the softer approach of removing over-enthusiastic endorsement
of failed projects in policy pages, we see the edit warring below.

Should we be OK with directing people in good faith to Wikinews in its
known failure state?

-Andrew


---

Over the years, it has been revert city regarding conflicting advice on
Wikinews in en:WP:NOTNEWS:

Wikinews is not a place to steer people:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not=763544913=763543985=source

Yes it is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not=763547213=763544913=source

No it isn't:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not=869215367=868178515=source

Yes, it is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not=869218732=869215507=source

No it isn't:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not=892851061=892427747=source

Yes it is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not=892895993=892851061=source

And so on.



-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

[Andrew Lih]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Andrew
>
> It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies that
> make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a
> poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand, Wikipedia is
> a success as a news-gathering operation.  These seem inconsistent to me.


As Wikimedians we are secondary source news summarizers rather than primary
source news gatherers. That’s where the difference lies primarily.

I have been a fan of the times Wikinews did original interviews with
notable folks [1] so this is perhaps a sustainable niche. But as a direct
news wire competitor to AP, Reuters or AFP, no.

[1]
https://en.m.wikinews.org/wiki/Shimon_Peres_discusses_the_future_of_Israel


> However, I conclude from what you're saying that the best way forward is to
> fold the Wikinews operation into Wikipedia.  Is that right?


Fold Wikinews altogether so it doesn’t confuse the public. Wikipedia
editors are already doing a stellar job.

Andrew


> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:15 PM Andrew Lih  wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
> > jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia
> > seems
> > > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with its
> > > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF should
> > > sort out the demarcation issues.
> > >
> >
> > Jennifer,
> >
> > This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the vast
> > majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that Wikinews
> > hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental properties.
> >
> > News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the truth
> given
> > the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing direct
> > observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies that
> make
> > Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:
> >
> > Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
> > Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
> > Wikipedia:V - verifiability
> > Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism
> >
> > Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this mismatch
> and
> > realize it is a poor fit.
> >
> > However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should
> celebrate
> > the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve minute to
> > minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as we know
> > it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality – the
> > Wikipedia article.
> >
> > If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
> > Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
> > [1]
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
> > [2]
> >
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html
> >
> > -Andrew
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

[Andrew Lih]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia seems
> to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with its
> encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason.  Maybe the WMF should
> sort out the demarcation issues.
>

Jennifer,

This has been a topic of discussion for more than a decade and the vast
majority of the community has converged on the conclusion that Wikinews
hasn't and won't ever work at any scale given its fundamental properties.

News is often described as "the best obtainable version of the truth given
the constraints of a deadline." News depends on memorializing direct
observation at a point in time. Therefore, the following policies that make
Wikipedia work are a bad fit for original, deadline reporting:

Wikipedia:NOR - no original research
Wikipedia:RS - requirement for reliable sources
Wikipedia:V - verifiability
Wikipedia:NORUSH - there is no deadline/eventualism

Most anyone who tries Wikinews first hand will experience this mismatch and
realize it is a poor fit.

However, rather than lament why Wikinews doesn't work, we should celebrate
the fact that we have found a better mode: entries that evolve minute to
minute (oftentimes second to second) to best reflect the world as we know
it. Embrace that new, live, constantly updated snapshot of reality – the
Wikipedia article.

If you want to see some of the earlier debates about the origins of
Wikinews, October 2004 is a good place to look:
[1]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/thread.html
[2]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2004-October/061017.html

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

[Andrew Lih]

Responses below:

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:07 PM Strainu  wrote:

>
> I would argue that, on the contrary, for the outside word we were less
> Wikipedia 10 years ago. Around that time there was still hope that
> Wikibooks or Wikinews could still be successful, at least in some
> languages. New language versions of other projects than Wikipedia were
> created relatively regularly and many people who started with
> Wikipedia moved on to maintain and develop other projects. Today the
> Foundation has all but given up on all other projects except the 3 you
> mention below (and, to some extent, Wikisource), Google is taking data
> from Wikipedia (but prefers other dictionaries instead of Wikt) and
> people barely hide a polite yawn when you talk about the other
> projects.
>

For the record, I was one of the earliest skeptics of Wikinews and was one
of the first accredited Wikinewsies in 2005. I believed the best way to
critically understand its flaws was to actually immerse myself in it. I
quickly saw it was not viable, and memorialized my thoughts about it for
Harvard Nieman Lab (below). I say this not to brag, but simply to say that
the "hope" of that era may be overhyped. :)

https://www.niemanlab.org/2010/02/why-wikipedia-beats-wikinews-as-a-collaborative-journalism-project/


> > - We stand on three legs (and more): If there was ever a time that
> > Wikimedia was more than Wikipedia, it is now. The trio of Wikipedia,
> > Commons and Wikidata is the bedrock of open knowledge sharing in a way
> that
> > was not true even 3 years ago.
>
> While that is true, the monolingual nature of the last 2 has left all
> but the most determined outside this revolution. While not directly
> relevant for the branding issue, it partially explains why people know
> about Wikipedia more: it's in their language!
>

Wait, I'm confused. Are you saying Wikidata is a "monolingual" project? As
a semantic database, it's perhaps the most multilingual-friendly project we
have. I've collaborated with Portuguese and French GLAM projects on
Wikidata because of how good it is at providing an interface for a shared
data set using the user's native tongue. So I'm eager to hear more about
why you believe Wikidata is in the "monolingual" bin.


> Specialization has clear advantages, but again, is not helping with
> branding towards the general public and that is our target, not GLAM
> or photographers.
>

This is a valid critique, though I'm not sure we've ever put the full force
of Foundation resources behind providing public awareness for Commons. It's
mostly been through community-level efforts and SiteNotice banners, to my
knowledge, for WLM, Commons POTY, Wiki Loves Africa, etc.

Not sure what the point is here. System biases are also obvious in
> Commons (copyright law) and Wikidata (very specific knowledge is
> required to understand how data is organized).
>

I think the point is: add the systemic bias of needing to know how to read
to the stack of the biases you also list here. There are a multitude of
challenges, and I think you absolutely win with "understanding copyright"
as the biggest user challenge we have. :)


> This war is specific to English Wikipedia and a few other wikis
> (admittedly, rather larger ones). Smaller communities have already
> largely embraced Wikidata in infoboxes and elsewhere. This has not
> changed how they represent themselves and I believe that the same
> holds true for the renaming.
>

Oh yes, there are many folks highly envious of Basque and Catalan Wikipedia
where Wikidata integration is used effectively on a large scale.


> Also, I believe it is mistaken to think of the branding proposal as a
> single, monolithic, yes-or-no proposal. It is rather a series of
> proposals, some easier and some more complicated to implement. Each
> should be analyzed independently for its own merits.
>

Agree. We won't know until/if it happens. I simply wanted to make sure a
broad set of concerns were being incorporated into the risk assessment.

Thanks
-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

[Andrew Lih]

meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_
> > Community_Conversations/Roles_%26_Responsibilities#Scoping_questions
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>



-- 
-Andrew Lih
Author of The Wikipedia Revolution
US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)
Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)
Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM
Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American
University, Columbia University, USC
---
Email: and...@andrewlih.com
WEB: https://muckrack.com/fuzheado
PROJECT: Wikipedia Space: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:WPSPACE
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: 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] FY1718 Fundraising Report now published

[Andrew Lih]

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 4:15 PM Amir Sarabadani  wrote:

> It might sound naive but Singapore also has lots of potential. Please
> correct me if I'm wrong.
>

We just had a meet-up there last month.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Singapore_X

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FY1718 Fundraising Report now published

[Andrew Lih]

On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 12:24 PM Ilario Valdelli  wrote:

> Yes but India has probably 2 times the population of the whole Europe...
> and cannot be defined like a "poor" country. I Think that the same is valid
> also for East Asia.
>
> No it's not simple to compare but the amount donated in Asia is really
> small.
>

1. Please note that the GDP per capita for China and India *combined* still
falls far short of the EU. [1]

2. For two of the major economies of East Asia, Wikipedia is *not* the
number one reference site for the general public. For China, it’s Baidu
Baike and for Korea, it’s Naver.

As Seddon said, it is a far more complex picture than looking at population
count and dollar amounts.

-Andrew

[1] -
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD?locations=EU-CN-IN
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

[Andrew Lih]

On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:31 AM Chris Keating 
wrote:

> Hi Lodewijk,
>
> If Wikimania was an entity rather than an event, it would be in the
> top 5 entities in the movement - a smaller budget than WMF, Wikimedia
> Deutschland and the Wiki Education Foundation but larger than anything
> else...
>

Chris, you seem to have a particular angle determined through fitting
particular data to your conclusion. A point by point breakdown will be
mired down in bickering, so let me address some misconceptions while also
embracing and agreeing with some of your feedback.

Since I've been to every single Wikimania and serve on the steering
committee, obviously I don't share your existential doubt about Wikimania's
role in our movement. But read on for things I do agree with you on
regarding the future of the conference. Again: I'm not speaking on behalf
of the commitee. This is just me.

- "If Wikimania was an entity rather than an event" - But it's not. The
goals, format and audience is completely different and makes for a
problematic financial comparison. But even if you get past that, I would
argue that annual Wikimania is indeed one of the "top 5" occurrences in our
community each year, even if it's not universally accessible to all
volunteers. It's where ideas and experiences are exchanged and the only
systematic way WMF openly interacts with the community in a face to face
format. Recall - WMCON/Wikimedia Summit is casting off the "learning and
capacity-building" and will be capped at 200 participants. This makes
Wikimania even more crucial in this role.

Important initiatives of our movement started at Wikimania. You state in
your user page you took part in one of the first GLAM engagement with the
British Museum in 2010 with the Hoxne Challenge. Did you know that the GLAM
movement had its genesis with Wikimania 2008 in Alexandria, Egypt, when
Liam Wyatt and the Wikimania organizers had the first "backstage pass" and
meeting with their staff? [1] [2]

- "it doesn't have any objectives" - But it does if you read the Wikimania
page, even if it is not down to the level of detail of an academic
conference or a board retreat. Wikimania is intentionally wiki-like in this
aspect, which may be what is perceived as a lack of objective. By design,
the ability of each team to run with a new concept is part of dynamic. One
of Wikipedia's pillars is "we're here to build an encyclopedia," and people
fill it with meaning. Similarly, the goal of Wikimania as "an annual
gathering of the Wikimedia community" is filled differently with meaning
from year to year with a BE BOLD ethos with different visions and
parameters of the organizing team. Some years there is an experimental idea
like 2016 Esino Lario.[3] Sometimes there is a button-downed public sector
co-conference like 2012 Tech@State. [4]

- "online discussion that reached a conclusion that no-one appears willing
to support" - As Lodewijk mentioned previously, there were significant
issues with the way the consultation was run so that the conclusion was
dubious. If you asked me to find the least desirable time period to do a
consultation, it would be exactly the one chosen – "15 December 2015 to 19
January 2016" when globally, most folks in the professional world and
academia are disengaged or removed from a computer screen. Additionally, it
is hard to produce useful dialogue around strict voting for three rigid
options. [5] Chris Schilling of the Foundation who oversaw the process was
clear in Esino Lario's meeting that the consultation was not binding as was
but one part of the discussion.

- Here's what I agree with you on:

-- Better reporting on results and evaluation of effectiveness - We do have
reporting on the outcomes on meta wiki, including detailed stats and
figures for each conference, as they need to be compared with the original
bid. But the long term analysis is often lacking, with folk knowledge being
more influential in decisions than explicit reporting and strategy. This
year's Wikimania evaluation by Douglas Scott was presented at the September
activities meeting and can be seen on the Youtube video. [6] But we rarely
get a chance to evaluate long term trends or effectiveness.

-- Diversity in the Wikimania Committee - We should go beyond the existing
practice of tapping previous Wikimania leads to be members. I was brought
on as part of that trend, but it should be continued to expand the size and
diversity of backgrounds of the committee. To be fair, it's a rather
thankless job that was cobbled together over the years out of necessity
rather than by design. But we should do better here.

- My overall view - Wikimedia/Wikipedia is a multibillion dollar brand that
is consistently in the top 10 most visited web sites in the world. It
shares that rarified air with companies in the hundreds of billions of
dollars in valuation. Wikipedia is built on the efforts of volunteers, and
it is vitally important we nurture that community or we die. Think about it
– 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 12:46 PM James Heilman  wrote:

> The Wikimedia Conference is "closed" in that only those who are invited are
> allowed to attend. Wikimania is an open conference meaning basically anyone
> can attend, including those currently outside the movement.


This is a great point – in fact, not only has the mission of the Wikimedia
Summit narrowed, the number of invite-only participants has shrunk as well
to a basic allocation of one individual per affiliate, with the aim of
having a maximum of 200 participants.

While I can understand the rationale of Cornelius Kibelka and the
WMCON/WMSUMMIT team for this decision, and can endorse its direction, the
fact remains that Wikimania being open to all and uncapped is a unique
cornerstone for sustaining the community.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:40 AM Chris Keating 
wrote:

> So it seems that the main rationale for an annual Wikimania brought up in
> the 2016 meeting was that Wikimania was vital for movement governance and
> accountability. Which wasn't particularly stressed in the WMF's
> consultation, but I can see why that kind of issue was very fresh in
> peoples' minds in 2016.
>

As the facilitator of the 2016 session discussing Wikimania, I don't recall
the "main rationale" of the discussion being about "governance and
accountability" and instead remember many more issues that stood out.

For example, the prominent phrases from the first part of the meeting
include the following, with most of the notes echoing these themes:
- inspiring, and connecting
- opportunity for different communities to meet
- important to use opportunity to do outreach
- empower important volunteers

> Now the Wikimedia Conference / Summit looks set to assume this role, what
> is the continued rationale for having Wikimania every year?

Given the above, I think the basis of the question is not sufficiently
established.

In fact, two recent reports or decisions reinforce Wikimania's role even
more:

1. From the Community Engagement Insights 2018 Report - "Discovery of new
projects and ideas is best at Wikimania: While all conferences had a high
proportion of participants that reported discovering new projects or ideas
as the most important outcome, Wikimania had the highest proportion of them
all." - The Community Engagement Insights 2018 Report [1] [2]

2. The Wikimedia Conference (WMCON) has pivoted to become the Wikimedia
Summit. In the process, they announced "learning and capacity-building will
not be part of the program." [2] Therefore I'd argue that the onus is even
*more* on conferences like Wikimania to facilitate this.

-Andrew

 [1] -
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Engagement_Insights/2018_Report#Community_Resources_team:_Local_and_regional_events_show_more_learning_and_building_skills_as_major_outcomes_than_larger_global_conferences,_while_Wikimania_excels_in_discovery_of_the_new

[2] -
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2018-September/091062.html
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Call for Proposals to Host Wikimania in 2020

[Andrew Lih]

Full disclosure: I’m a member of the Wikimania Committee but I am not
speaking on behalf of that body in this mail.

The current custom is that Wikimania happens every year and that while the
selection is made by the Wikimania Committee, the WMF has final approval
over the selection and the operational parameters around its execution.

There was a consultation and discussion in 2015 about the future of
Wikimania, and subsequent followup with in-person discussions at Wikimania
2016, Esino Lario, where there was overwhelming support for continuing the
yearly model.

You can read more about the consultation and followups in these links.
Thanks.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Towards_a_New_Wikimania
https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Discussions/The_future_of_Wikimania
https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/Wikimania2016-discussion7b

-Andrew


On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 11:07 AM Philip Kopetzky 
wrote:

> Hi Ellie,
>
> is there an official statement by the WMF that explains why Wikimania 2020
> is happening and that the funding for this event is secured? Wikimania does
> cost quite a lot of money and I was under the impression that it was
> unclear as to if, how and why Wikimania should take place 2020. But maybe
> I'm also mistaken on that point.
>
> Best,
> Philip
>
> On Sat, 8 Sep 2018 at 18:53, Ellie Young  wrote:
>
> > No.   We are looking more at rotating regions if we can, and excellent
> > proposals/teams.
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 3:31 AM Joseph Seddon 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Ellie,
> > >
> > > Is Wikimania still on its programme of "1 EU/US Wikimania" followed by
> an
> > > "Away Wikimania"?
> > >
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 11:44 PM Ellie Young 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The Wikimania Steering Committee and Wikimedia Foundation are seeking
> > > > expressions of interest from interested parties for
> > > >  hosting
> > > > Wikimani
> > > > a 2020.
> > > >
> > > > Please see the following for more information:
> > > >
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania_2020
> > > >
> > > > If you are interested in discussing the possibilities and working
> with
> > > the
> > > > WMF Events Manager in preparing a proposal to host and organize
> > Wikimania
> > > > 20
> > > > 20
> > > > , please contact eyoung at wikimedia.org
> > > > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimania-l> by
> October
> > > > 15th.  Also, if you
> > > > know of an individual or group that we should approach about hosting,
> > we
> > > > encourage  nominations as well. The Steering Committee and WMF expect
> > to
> > > > make a decision by early
> > > > 2019.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, Ellie
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > --
> > Ellie Young
> > Events Manager
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > eyo...@wikimedia.org
> > c. 510 701 8649
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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/Guidel

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RFC on wikimedia-l posting limits

[Andrew Lih]

I'd like to second what Rob has expressed here. This list already suffers a
very poor reputation within our community, even as it is positioned as an
important part of our communications ecosystem.

Allowing participants to intimidate others and exact "in real life"
consequences should be dealt with in the most severe manner. If we do
not meatball:DefendEachOther, and deliver the basic safety needs of the
list membership, how can we in good conscience keep this list running and
encourage participation?

-Andrew


On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Robert Fernandez 
wrote:

> I am grateful that the moderators have taken some action, but I am
> disappointed that contacting a person's employer is not yet seen as an
> uncrossable line here.
>
> Out of respect to your call for civility I will refrain from directly
> responding to the person in question despite his allegations against me.
> It is a mistake to frame this as a free speech issue.  It is of course in
> the interests of a person engaging in bullying and harassing behavior to
> claim people are trying to suppress their powerful truths, but there is no
> reason we have to accept this duplicitous framing.  The content of the
> message is immaterial, the behavior is the issue.  Some people may see this
> as a grey area given that it was a Foundation employee, but I see it as a
> slippery slope.  Seddon's job is almost certainly safe, but this might not
> be the case for the next victim.  Will the poster in question decide that I
> am "bullying and harassing" him and attempt to contact my employer next?
>
> Most of my fellow board members of my chapter are the employees of US
> government agencies or connected to the Foundation as an employee or a
> grant recipient.   Given the unusual political climate in the US I worry
> that the former group are particularly vulnerable to harassment targeting
> their employment.   (Media outlets favored by the current US presidential
> administration have targeted individual Wikimedia editors, including
> myself, in the past.)  If participants on this list are allowed to engage
> in this sort of harassment without real consequence, I will advise that my
> chapter and its board members and volunteers no longer participate on this
> list due to the risk to their livelihoods.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 5:45 AM, Shani Evenstein 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Wikimedia-l,
> >
> > Rogol has been placed under moderation, but at this point no decision has
> > been made to ban him from the list. As long as his messages are
> reasonable,
> > respectful and on point, his messages will go through. We agreed that it
> is
> > important to allow a diversity of voices to be heard, including those of
> > "frequent flyers" in the list, especially as we work collaboratively on
> > next steps towards a healthier community atmosphere.
> >
> > In addition, we are asking everyone to refrain from focusing on specific
> > individuals posting to the list, put any personal issues aside and stay
> on
> > problem. We want as many people as possible to productively and
> objectively
> > participate in the discussion, till we draft clearer guidelines for
> posting
> > to the list. We are aware that these guidelines will not automagically
> fix
> > all of our issues as a global community, but we believe they will help
> > reduce the noise substantially. Do keep on debating. We are trying to
> > intervene as little as possible at this point and let the debate run its
> > course.
> >
> > Best,
> > Shani Evenstein, on behalf of the Wikimedia-l Admins.
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 8:52 PM, James Salsman 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Why are we having this RFC prior to the survey which was discussed at
> >> length less than a year ago?
> >>
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#Peri
> >> odic_survey_prototype
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 1:05 AM, Robert Fernandez
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Since Rogol has followed through on his threat he should be banned
> from
> >> the
> >> > list, or we should have a public statement from the moderators
> regarding
> >> > why they will not do so.
> >> >
> >> > I can't imagine many actions that would have a more chilling effect on
> >> > participation here than one of this list's most frequent posters
> >> contacting
> >> > your employer because he disagrees with what you have to say.
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Joseph Seddon  >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Since you kindly emailed my line manage Rogol, I wanted to confirm
> >> that my
> >> >> choice of words were very carefully chosen.
> >> >>
> >> >> And I stand by them.
> >> >>
> >> >> Seddon
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 8:25 PM, Rogol Domedonfors <
> >> domedonf...@gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Joseph
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I chose my wording quite carefully, and suggest that you do so too.
> >> I
> >> >> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] News on Wkipedia

[Andrew Lih]

1. You misread en:WP:NOTNEWS . The policy doesn't say news is forbidden. It
is that Wikipedia should consider notability and original research concerns
and not act as a newspaper.

Actual wording: "editors are encouraged to include current and up-to-date
information within its coverage, and to develop stand-alone articles on
significant current events."

2. You misunderstand the Wikimedia Foundation role in these areas. Please
take this discussion to the proper places on Wikipedia [[
Wikipedia_talk:In_the_news]] and/or Wikinews.

Thanks.


On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 4:54 AM, Rogol Domedonfors 
wrote:

> In a recent blog post, "No, we’re not in a post-fact world. On Wikipedia,
> facts matter.", the Foundation referred to Wikipedia editors"sharing
> breaking news in record time".  It is true that the English-language
> Wikipedia is increasingly carrying articles about newsworthy events, and
> this in spite of its WP:NOTNEWS policy.
>
> Has the Foundation made a conscious decision to promote Wikipedia as a
> source of news, and if so, what were the results of its discussions with
> the Wikipedia and Wikinews communities?  Will the Foundation allocate any
> extra resources to this effort?
>
> Rognvald
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Katherine Maher is making me happy this week

[Andrew Lih]

Thanks David.

More than a year ago, I started a “What’s Making You Happy” prompt in the
Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group as a weekly invitation for folks to share
their stories, large and small. I’m glad to see it spreading to more
corners of our community.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/

-Andrew



On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 6:00 AM, David Cuenca Tudela 
wrote:

> Hello everybody,
>
> Normally in our community we used to send angry emails when we were not
> happy with how things are going, and we were not sending enough emails of
> satisfaction and encouragement. I don't know who started it, but the "what
> is making​ you happy this week" series might be one of the best social
> achievements our movement has reached.
>
> To continue on that line I would like to tell you what made me happy this
> week, but about Katherine Maher, our current leader. In particular about
> this video:
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8BuyKmjy7Rw
>
> If you haven't watched it, do it now and get to know Katherine. I think we
> as a community don't deserve a leader like her, at least not yet. The
> reason is because she's​ way more advanced than us at seeing how the world
> is going and what is there to be done about it.
>
> We can have as many Strategy Talks as we want, but as long as we as a
> community are not ready to rally to put ourselves behind Katherine and
> fully support her with her mission, it will be all for nothing.
>
> The way I perceive Katherine is a charismatic leader full of light, but her
> light is not reaching us fully because we are not giving her enough power
> yet. I want to invite all of you as individuals to reflect upon this and
> ask yourself if you are as ready as me to support Katherine for the
> personal benefit and the whole movement benefit.
>
>
> I have never done this before but allow me some tolerance to speak on
> behalf of the community. Not because I have been elected but because I love
> it so much and I want the best for it. So if I were to speak on behalf of
> the community I would tell this to Katherine: stop having so much patience
> with us.
>
> There was a time when patience was good and necessary, but not anymore. Set
> yourself free and do as you please, because I see no possible harm in your
> intentions. Don't be afraid about going too fast. The community needs
> challenges to grow and if you don't bring them forward, we will not grow
> enough to face the world of tomorrow, or today, or yesterday.
>
> We are behind in our progress because of you, Katherine. We need that you
> bring to the table ALL what you can do, but you need to do it wisely, and
> you lack a bit of that too.
> So my advice is to challenge us, but ask first wise people in the movement
> first. There are a few of them, but they do exist: Andrea Zanni, Asaf
> Bartov, even Délphine (never meet her properly) are clear examples of wise
> people. Over time and with practice you will be able to find more, and in
> the end you will be wise enough to enlighten us all.
>
> In my more than 10 years in the movement and my particular involved in
> leadership, I could have never imagined that we would be so lucky to find a
> leader like Katherine. When by chance she was here in Belgium, I live in
> Leuven, I asked to meet her. Of course it was not possible, but I use the
> opportunity to tell her what I wanted to in that meeting: Katherine, I love
> you, not in a romantic way, but the way you are as a person, don't be
> afraid if others cannot see you for who you are, you are just great the way
> you are.
>
> In a past Conference I brought some gifts to people I cared about, but I am
> lucky that I won't be attending this Wikimania (only the Wikidata
> conference this year). I feel lucky because I will not have to bring a gift
> for Katherine, the only person who was deserved my admiration this year,
> and it would be too hard to pick an appropriate gift for her... The Moon?
> The stars? They are hard to transport, anyway.
>
> Please forgive me for my ramblings. I just think that Katherine is great
> and that she deserves more emails like this one.
>
> Cheers,
> Micru
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikitribune!

[Andrew Lih]

Thanks for the reminder about that message, I had actually forgotten about
it.
-Andrew


On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 4:23 AM, Andrea Zanni 
wrote:

> Last time I remember we had a discussion¹ was September 2011 (!):
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-
> September/thread.html
>
> There are several threads worth revisiting:
> I was looking for an old-but-great Andrew Lih's post about Wikinews², and I
> re-discovered that a project had forkedfrom Wikinews in 2011³: it was
> called the http://theopenglobe.org, and (spoiler) it's now dead.
>
> Generally speaking, I think that Jimmy experimenting with another project
> speaks volume:
> and I do think it's a good idea.
>
> Simply put, we have a lot of zombie projects, and we¹ never had the will to
> do the tough decision
> of killing them... *or* really investing in them.
> At the moment, the actual policy with sister projects (all of them, minus
> Wikidata), is
> "don't ask don't tell".
>
> The communities do what they can, and what they cannot do they don't.
> There is no non-volunteer development, and even no knowledge about sister
> projects, both within the WMF and the rest of the movement. Wikipedians
> rarely go in sister projects.
>
> I really hope this Strategy process will be seen by the larger community as
> the right chance to discuss all this. A lot of strategy statements go into
> the direction "collect/provide all written and oral knowledge ever
> produced", which is more or less our vision, and this is why we thought to
> create non-encyclopedic projects in the first place (a image archive; a
> library; a dictionary; a quote compendium; etc.).
>
> It's probably time that we have this conversation.
>
> Aubrey
> (your friendly occasional Nemo)
> Wikisource Community User Group
>
>
> 
> ¹ meaning, *we* that live on these mailing lists
> ² this:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-
> September/068381.html
> ³
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/2011-
> September/068290.html
>
> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 9:39 AM, Ariel Glenn WMF 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jimmy,
> >
> > The articles I've read on the new venture have been like appetizers,
> > providing just enough information to generate a new list of questions.
> :-)
> > So, in no particular order, here are some things that came to mind:
> >
> > Will the focus be investigative journalism, or "deep dives" in the manner
> > of newsdeeply.com, or breaking news, or something else?
> >
> > AIUI, fact-checking will be done by community volunteers in the
> > collaborative manner of Wikipedia; will they flag information that they
> > consider to be problematic, annotate draft news articles with comments
> and
> > questions, revise drafts themselves,...?
> >
> > The website shows an initial goal of ten journalists to be hired; does
> this
> > include copy editors as well?  And more generally, how will copy editing
> be
> > handled?
> >
> > With what frequency do you envision news to be published, e.g. a weekly
> > magazine, a daily feed of several short pieces and one feature article,
> > ...?
> >
> > Who will have access to journalists' notes and other raw materials?  How
> > will sources be protected while permitting maximum participation of
> > community volunteers in the vetting/fact-checking process?  Will there be
> > provision for leakers, i.e. some sort of SecureDrop thing?  If so, how
> will
> > that be handled?
> >
> > Will guides be produced around vetting of information, like e.g. the
> guide
> > at verificationhandbook.com?  More generally, how will community members
> > learn vetting and verification skills for journalism?
> >
> > How will good-faith disputes around fact-checking be resolved and by
> whom?
> > How will trolls be handled?
> >
> > Will Wikitribune journalists collaborate with other groups doing
> > like-minded work, for example bellingcat.com?
> >
> > I gather that there are developers working on this project too, at least
> on
> > wordpress hacking; are they also part of the crowdfunding?  More
> generally,
> > is budget/staffing information available or will it be soon?
> >
> > What roles will the four named advisors play in this project, with their
> > specific skillsets?
> >
> > In an ever shrinking paid market for journalism, where funding is harder
> > and harder to come by and many publications have closed their doors or
> > turned digital-only, what are your thoughts about competing in that
> market,
> > both as a job provider and potentially taking subscribers from other
> media?
> >
> > Please feel free to ramble on at length about these topics as much as you
> > like; I'm interested in the broader picture and not just the specific
> > details :-)
> >
> > Thanks a lot!
> >
> > Ariel
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:59 AM, Jimmy Wales 
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Today I announced a new initiative, outside of my Wikimedia 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] More politics: "WMF Annual Report"

[Andrew Lih]

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 3:46 AM, George William Herbert <
george.herb...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think that the idea of taking the weekend off from the topic is
> excellent.  We may not have reached universal consensus yet but everything
> we needed to have said was, and it's been acknowledged as received and
> under consideration.
>

I truly hope no one takes any discussion here as indicating anything
approaching “universal consensus.”

Wikimedia-L is a self-selected set of participants who are wiling to
tolerate the culture on the list. It should not be assumed to be a
representative slice of community sentiment.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] documentaries about Wikipedia

[Andrew Lih]

PS: One more video in that collection that was used:

Wiki Loves Libraries 2013
https://vimeo.com/78005986



On Sat, Dec 10, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Andrew Lih <andrew@gmail.com> wrote:

> While this is not a documentary per se, this video is a “reel” of the best
> videos of the Wikimedia movement strung together that in the US, we’ve
> played before edit-a-thons and events. It’s about 25 minutes in total, and
> there’s a countdown timer in the upper left hand corner that helps give
> folks a sense of when an event starts.
>
> We’ve found this helps provide some energy to the room and is useful for
> people new to the movement to see human faces behind projects all around
> the world. It was used at Wikiconference North America, the United Nations,
> and Wikimedia DC edit-a-thons. You’re welcome to use it and to give us
> ideas on how to improve it.
>
> https://vimeo.com/191543645
>
> Videos used:
>
> Edit 2015
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm1LKcHD1VE
>
> Mexico edit-a-thon
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94KtOE39Hyw
>
> #BlackLifeMatters Wikipedia Edit-a-thon in Harlem, New York City
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbSaPf-9B6Q
>
> Summer Wikicamp 2015 - Armenia
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12g9645x6gA
>
> What is Wikipedia Zero? - Jimmy narration
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaZf6h0Pus8
>
> Wikimania 2016
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SufXYsbMI8E
>
> Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the Innovation Hub
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVIGfA0WqI8
>
> The 2016 Wikimedia Hackathon in Jerusalem
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFR2_4GEnoQ
>
>
> -Andrew
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Mardetanha <mardetanha.w...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>> We (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Wikimedians_User_Group) have
>>  been invited to talk about Wikipedia in one of Iranian well-known and
>> respected academic gatherings.
>> As part of this we have 40 minute time to show a film (preferably a
>> documentary ) about our movement, I am aware of
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_about_Wikipedia but I would
>> like to know if you have anything else in your disposal?
>> Thanks
>> Mardetanha
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
>> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: 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
New messages to: 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] documentaries about Wikipedia

[Andrew Lih]

While this is not a documentary per se, this video is a “reel” of the best
videos of the Wikimedia movement strung together that in the US, we’ve
played before edit-a-thons and events. It’s about 25 minutes in total, and
there’s a countdown timer in the upper left hand corner that helps give
folks a sense of when an event starts.

We’ve found this helps provide some energy to the room and is useful for
people new to the movement to see human faces behind projects all around
the world. It was used at Wikiconference North America, the United Nations,
and Wikimedia DC edit-a-thons. You’re welcome to use it and to give us
ideas on how to improve it.

https://vimeo.com/191543645

Videos used:

Edit 2015
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm1LKcHD1VE

Mexico edit-a-thon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94KtOE39Hyw

#BlackLifeMatters Wikipedia Edit-a-thon in Harlem, New York City
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbSaPf-9B6Q

Summer Wikicamp 2015 - Armenia
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12g9645x6gA

What is Wikipedia Zero? - Jimmy narration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZaZf6h0Pus8

Wikimania 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SufXYsbMI8E

Wikipedia Edit-a-thon at the Innovation Hub
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVIGfA0WqI8

The 2016 Wikimedia Hackathon in Jerusalem
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFR2_4GEnoQ


-Andrew


On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Mardetanha 
wrote:

> Dear all,
> We (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Wikimedians_User_Group) have
>  been invited to talk about Wikipedia in one of Iranian well-known and
> respected academic gatherings.
> As part of this we have 40 minute time to show a film (preferably a
> documentary ) about our movement, I am aware of
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_films_about_Wikipedia but I would
> like to know if you have anything else in your disposal?
> Thanks
> Mardetanha
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] LGBT+ safety considerations for conference venues

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 3:00 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> You do not get it. Wikimania is first and foremost about spreading the word
> about what we do and who we are.
>

{{citationneeded}}

The reality is Wikimania is largely a community event first, with the
public outreach element an enhancement or afterthought.

The Wikimania meta page doesn’t include the words “spread”, “outreach”,
“public”, or “educate” at all.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimania

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

[Wikimedia-l] WikiConference North America - Submissions deadline Aug 31

[Andrew Lih]

WikiConference North America 2016
7-10 October 2016, San Diego, CA, USA

SUBMISSIONS DEADLINE: August 31, 11:59pm Samoa Time!

https://wikiconference.org/wiki/Submissions

WikiConference North America (formerly WikiConference USA) is the third
annual conference on the North American continent devoted to Wikipedia and
other Wikimedia projects. The weekend will feature both academic and casual
presentations on Wikimedia-related outreach activities, workshops to
improve the skills of grassroots organizers, and discussions on the past,
present, and future of the Wikimedia projects. The conference features
offerings about community outreach, online activity, partnerships with
institutions of knowledge, and technology.

Keynote speakers are scheduled to include Katherine Maher, Executive
Director of the Wikimedia Foundation, and Merrilee Proffitt, Senior Program
Officer of OCLC Research. The last day of the conference will feature
programming coinciding with Indigenous Peoples' Day.

Registration for the conference is now open.  You can register at
https://wikiconference.org.

Scholarships partially covering costs of travel and attendance are
available for active contributors to Wikimedia projects.  Apply by August
23rd for scholarships at https://wikiconference.org/wiki/2016/Scholarships.

This is a volunteer run conference and volunteers are needed for any number
of tasks.  If you are attending, please consider volunteering for at
https://wikiconference.org/wiki/Volunteers.

We seek presentations addressing topics related to Wikipedia or open access
and culture. Presentations may be from any discipline regarding any
relevant topic. Please submit a description of your proposed presentation
using our online submission process at https://wikiconference.org/
wiki/Submissions.  If you are interested in participating in the
peer-reviewed academic track, see our call for academic submissions at
https://wikiconference.org/wiki/Call_for_Academic_Presentations.

- Sydney Poore (User:FloNight) and Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight
(User:Rosiestep), conference organizers
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] WikiConference North America, October 7-10 in San Diego

[Andrew Lih]

WikiConference North America 2016
7-10 October 2016, San Diego, CA, USA

SCHOLARSHIP DEADLINE: August 23!

WikiConference North America (formerly WikiConference USA) is the third
annual conference on the North American continent devoted to Wikipedia and
other Wikimedia projects. The weekend will feature both academic and casual
presentations on Wikimedia-related outreach activities, workshops to
improve the skills of grassroots organizers, and discussions on the past,
present, and future of the Wikimedia projects. The conference features
offerings about community outreach, online activity, partnerships with
institutions of knowledge, and technology.

Keynote speakers are scheduled to include Katherine Maher, Executive
Director of the Wikimedia Foundation, and Merrilee Proffitt, Senior Program
Officer of OCLC Research. The last day of the conference will feature
programming coinciding with Indigenous Peoples' Day.

Registration for the conference is now open.  You can register at https://
wikiconference.org.

Scholarships partially covering costs of travel and attendance are
available for active contributors to Wikimedia projects.  Apply by August
23rd for scholarships at https://wikiconference.org/wiki/2016/Scholarships.

This is a volunteer run conference and volunteers are needed for any number
of tasks.  If you are attending, please consider volunteering for at
https://wikiconference.org/wiki/Volunteers.

We seek presentations addressing topics related to Wikipedia or open access
and culture. Presentations may be from any discipline regarding any
relevant topic. Please submit a description of your proposed presentation
using our online submission process at https://wikiconference.org/wiki
/Submissions.  If you are interested in participating in the peer-reviewed
academic track, see our call for academic submissions at https://
wikiconference.org/wiki/Call_for_Academic_Presentations.

- Sydney Poore (User:FloNight) and Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight
(User:Rosiestep), conference organizers
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] An example where search could be improved

[Andrew Lih]

We recently had a thread in the Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group, where we
pretty much concluded the reason why we don’t have word in English for
“looked it up in Wikipedia” is because that word is “Googled it.” :)

https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/1050447111669786/

-Andrew



On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Jimmy Wales 
wrote:

> First, some context:
>
> I was in Philadelphia for the Democratic National Convention earlier
> this week, where I had been invited to speak (in a small side event)
> about connectivity and global development.  I spoke about our work in
> the languages of the developing world, and made a point to say that bad
> laws in the developed world which might hurt our work can be damaging
> for the development of the Internet in the rest of the world and urged
> lawmakers to not just think of various Internet legal questions as being
> "Silicon Valley versus Hollywood" but to understand that they impact how
> our volunteer community and many other ordinary people online.
>
> Second, the story:
>
> The main conference was held in the [[Wells Fargo Center
> (Philadelphia)]], an indoor arena where basketball and hockey teams play
> normally.
>
> A journalist friend said to me that he "finally found something that
> Wikipedia doesn't have" and he was surprised.  What was that, I said?
> "The history of Wells Fargo".  What?!!  Really?!! That seemed impossible
> to me.  He said we have an article about Wells Fargo that seems to be
> mostly about the contemporary bank, and when you search for Wells Fargo
> history there's also an article about the Wells Fargo History Museum.
>
> I popped on my phone and used my own personal preferred method of
> finding things in Wikipedia: Google.  I typed in "Wells Fargo history"
> and sure enough, the first two links are history pages from their
> official websites and the third link is Wikipedia - a normal state of
> affairs.  He started to apologize for raising a false alarm
>
> I asked him for more details on exactly how he searched, and explained
> that I regard it to be very sad if some volunteers spend hundreds of
> hours working on an article, painstakingly going over tons of details in
> an effort to get it right, and then someone couldn't find it.
>
> Here's what he did - and I replicated the steps and all was clear.
>
> Go to http://www.wikipedia.org/
>
> Make sure the dropdown in the search box is set to 'EN' - which it would
> have been for him.
>
> Start typing 'Wells Fargo history' and watch as the dropdown selections
> narrow.  You'll have the experience that he had - you'll see the bank
> article prominently featured and then various buildings (they have a
> habit of sponsoring sports arenas in various US cities) and finally as
> you start typing history it focuses in on the History Museum.
>
> If you don't choose any of those, then hit enter, you'll get to the
> search results page.  This is the one with a huge box of options at the
> top (which will be confusing and frightening to people who aren't
> already wikipedians) and then by my count the desired article is 13th on
> the page: [[History of Wells Fargo]].
>
> Now, I strongly suspect this could be fixed by making a redirect from
> [[Wells Fargo history]] to [[History of Wells Fargo]].
>
> Or a more serious fix could be had if the search engine understood that
> very very often in English [[X of Y]] can be written [[Y X]].  ([[List
> of French monarchs]] becomes [[French monarchs list]], see:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=french+monarchs+list
> where the desired article is in 10th place.
>
> But my point is not to argue for any specific fix.  My point is to
> illustrate that there is a real problem with search, that it is
> impacting users, and that we should invest in fixing it.
>
> --Jimbo
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] What can we learn

[Andrew Lih]

Did you miss a “not” in there?

Fae said:
“Trustees are an unpaid volunteer position, leaving your seat should be
made to appear like a royal abdication or the result of failure.”

Suggested edit:
“…leaving your seat should NOT be made to appear like a royal abdication or
the result of failure.”



On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 6:51 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> It's quite normal for Trustees to step down due to changing interests
> or after a review of interests. It would be great if the WMF board
> could move over to a culture where there was far less drama and chest
> beating about managing and declaring interests. Trustees are an unpaid
> volunteer position, leaving your seat should be made to appear like a
> royal abdication or the result of failure.
>
> The practice in the UK chapter established back when I was a trustee,
> of making comprehensive declarations of interest and loyalty is
> something that the WMF could easily follow at zero cost. The *default*
> position should be that this information is public unless there are
> jolly good reasons to make it private, and those exceptions should be
> carefully reviewed by the Chairperson who has the final say on whether
> it ought to be made public. Further, every board meeting needs a
> standing agenda including declarations for the coming agenda. For
> example, Jimmy's interest as the owner of Wikia has in the last decade
> never resulted in a simple declaration of interest in the public
> minutes, nor has he declined to vote on a resolution because of that
> interest. Declarations should be run of the mill, not a matter of
> apparent shame and drama.
>
> Fae
>
> On 9 April 2016 at 07:26, Anders Wennersten 
> wrote:
> > I, as all others, has full sympathy for Danny and find that he in his
> mail
> > made an excellent explanation on how the situation made the option to
> resign
> > the only reasonable way forward
> >
> > BUT this is the second community selected that has left the Board within
> a
> > year after being appointed, and before any future election (either a snap
> > byelection soon, or the ordinary in a years time) I believe we should
> look
> > into if anything can be learnt. And if there are things, primary in the
> > election process, that can be done to ensure the appointed community
> > selected members of the Board staying on the whole term.
> >
> > For Danny my interpretation is that he is very operational role in
> ordinary
> > work leads to many interaction with WMF etc and where COI consideration
> > hampers his day-to-days activities. And that his major strength,
> "Wikidata",
> > is hard to make use of in the Board as any influencing of decision re
> this
> > also puts him in a COI situation, and that he outside this competence
> finds
> > he has limited "value" for the board work.
> >
> > But all of these facts was known before the election (but not necessary
> the
> > ramification). Would a more elaborate (tedious long?) description of
> > requirements of serving in the Board helped Danny to understand the
> > challenge before he entered his candidacy? Would some type of
> (lightweight)
> > "vetting" by the Election committee by all candidates have identified
> this
> > risk (which then could have been feedbacked to the candidate)? Should for
> > future election the election committee not only be facilitator of the
> > election, but also help he voters in complementing the data given by each
> > candidate by some type of comments? For example last time the requirement
> > from the board was non western (non English natives) persons and priority
> > for nonmale. but 2 out of 3 was just his. Could some mark on the
> candidate
> > statement made by the EC (he/she is/is not fulfilling the Board criteria)
> > had helped?
> >
> > The setup up of a Standing Election Committee is under formation but it
> will
> > probably still be some month before it is established. Any changes in the
> > election process has to await this formation, but I believe a discussion
> of
> > learnings can start independently.
> >
> > Anders
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
>
>
>
> --
> 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
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Open and recorded WMF Board meetings

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Dariusz Jemielniak 
wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Risker  wrote:
>
> Thanks. I think one idea would be to e.g. invite a community representative
> to each meeting as an observer, responsible for reviewing the minutes. This
> would always be a different person, and by design it could be e.g. always a
> former board/FDC member, or chapter representative, or former arbiter from
> wikis that have arbiters, or a steward - anyhow, someone who is legitimized
> without the need to organize yet another elections.
>
> To reduce costs, this person could be connecting via Hangout, but physical
> presence would also be an option. We could ask this person their views, but
> they would mostly be an observer.
>

I’d be eager to try this idea of observers/scribes from the community, with
the slight amendment that I don’t think it *needs* to be a different person
every time, though it should certainly be open to participation as much as
possible. I’d also like for it to be open to folks from “the media” of our
community, such as The Signpost.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Post mortems

[Andrew Lih]

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Thyge  wrote:

> I acknowledge that a group of wikipedians may discuss in any forum, they
> prefer. Doing
> it in a closed forum on FB does not, however, constitute a discussion by
> the community,
> because it excludes a  lot of people who reject i.e. the FB license, the FB
> terms of use, and
> last not least the FB privacy policy.
>

True, though IRC also excludes a lot of people as it’s not allowed to be
logged, thereby leaving many people out of the loop.

As was mentioned in the introduction message, it is not meant to replace
anything that exists currently and it does not purport to declare itself
“the community.” (Though “the community” has always been a vague and
imperfect construct so as to be nearly meaningless, even before the
emergence of this Facebook group.)

If the forum helps with engagement with our movement, I’m glad it serves
that purpose, such as highlighting goings-on in spaces we already have.


> The latter is of special interest to me after having served as an ombudsman
> for wikimedia.
> Are people aware of the fact, that joining that group and commenting there
> could easily lead to
> their real identity being linked to their wiki user name - and that this in
> some cases could be
> more dangerous than "voicing their opinions in other forums"?
>

I’d be shocked if people participating there were not aware that their IRL
identities could be linked to their Wikipedia identities. That’s a
determination folks have made, and are satisfied with. Though, this is
probably not a bad thing to remind folks of in that intro message.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Post mortems

[Andrew Lih]

Hi all, it’s probably useful to paste in the “What for?” message for the
Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group. Hopefully it will help clear things up.

—-
From:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/wikipedia-weekly/introduction-to-the-ww-group/961015923946239

This is a quick note about what goes on here in the Wikipedia Weekly
Facebook group. Thanks for joining what has become a useful forum in the
last few years, and especially in recent months.

Perhaps a useful motto for this group is: "High signal, key voices,
efficient volume." That's a label few would use to describe Wikimedia-L or
on-wiki discussions, even though those are very necessary and key parts of
the movement. In many ways, this is a meta-news group, pointing to the best
and most interesting things happening in our community and the public. It's
not meant to be a direct replacement for any venue that exists now.

This group started informally as a lively community space in lieu of, or in
reaction to, Wikipedia Weekly podcast episodes. Signpost, Wikimedia chapter
folks, WMF comms team, bloggers or any concerned community members are
welcome in the interest of productive and informative discussions about the
movement. One of the key aspects is that this is a respectful and highly
interactive space that, like it or not, is Facebook's main value.

As for the public/private nature of what is said here: we probably don't
have a great term for it. In some sense, it's like the open access vs TWL
(The Wikipedia Library) argument – should the comments here be referenced
(or given prominence) if it's firewalled behind a Facebook login. People
can be expected to be quoted here, but not truly hyperlinked-to. Signpost,
for example, has referenced discussions here on multiple occasions in its
news stories. This group might get people to write opinions they wouldn't
voice in other forums. I see that as a useful part of our communications
ecosystem.

Experiments like Discourse (https://discourse.wmflabs.org/) might be the
answer to help moderate the noisy, disparate and acerbic social spaces in
our movement, and I welcome it. For now, I like that this group is serving
an unmet need, and I thank the folks here for making it engaged and
meaningful.


On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 7:26 PM, Risker  wrote:

> I can agree with what you're saying, Craig.  I can also understand what
> Brandon is saying - that some people prefer that interface.
>
> Unlike many Facebook pages, though, this one is not public and cannot be
> viewed by anyone who does not have a FB account.  It's the one venue that
> many interested parties cannot even read, let alone participate in, unless
> they're willing to give up some fairly significant privacy.  I am
> disappointed, but I do not hold it against anyone for preferring to discuss
> issues in a venue not associated with Wikimedia.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On 21 February 2016 at 19:01, Craig Franklin 
> wrote:
>
> > People will have discussions at a location that is personally convenient
> > for them.  Unless you're going to reprogram human nature, I don't see
> that
> > there's anything to be done about the resulting balkanisation of the
> > discussion.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Craig
> >
> > On 22 February 2016 at 09:54, Thyge  wrote:
> >
> > > I really wonder why wikimedia discussions have migrated to FB. Are we
> > > applying for a grant?
> > >
> > > Thyge
> > >
> > > 2016-02-22 0:51 GMT+01:00 Newyorkbrad :
> > >
> > > > I too am one of those people who is not to be found on Facebook.  I
> > > > only have room in my life for one online timesink ... and I already
> > > > have Wikipedia :)
> > > >
> > > > Newyorkbrad
> > > >
> > > > On 2/21/16, Risker  wrote:
> > > > > As has already been explained on this list, many people do not have
> > > > access
> > > > > to Facebook.  If this is something germane and useful to a lot of
> > > people
> > > > on
> > > > > this list, perhaps it would be appropriate to ask Jonathan to post
> it
> > > > here.
> > > > >
> > > > > Risker/Anne
> > > > >
> > > > > On 21 February 2016 at 18:34, Anthony Cole 
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> For those not following, I recommend the discussion in response to
> > > > >> Jonathan
> > > > >> Cardy's comment here:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/960989863948845/
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Anthony Cole
> > > > >> ___
> > > > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > >> Unsubscribe:
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> > > ,
> > > > >>  > ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > > > ___
> > > > > Wikimedia-l 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Outcomes from the Consultation on Wikimedia movement conferences/Wikimania

[Andrew Lih]

Your comments are inaccurate, not useful, and completely antithetical to
our principles.

On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Henning Schlottmann 
wrote:

> On 09.02.2016 16:40, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>
> > When you cap Wikimania, who is not to come?
>
> Employees of the WMF and the chapters, other than WMF's community
> engagement team and maybe - just maybe - selected speakers as speakers,
> not as general participants.
>
> Wikimania is not for and about employees, they should not be welcome.
>
> Check out the speakers of the last few years: Employees have hijacked
> this volunteer event.
>
> Make Wikimania a volunteer conference again. Let volunteers share
> experiences and ideas, not listen to employees telling them what to do
> and how to do it.
>
> Ciao Henning
>
>
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reducing the net cost of Wikimania

[Andrew Lih]

GerardM,

As much as I agree with you on many things related to Wikimania, your
statement about en.wp and USA being “over subsidized” is off base.

For the last few years I’ve held my tongue as American applicants get a
fraction of 10% of all the funding for Wikimania scholarships. That’s
because 10% is allocated to all of North America, so US based folks compete
with Canadians for that small slice of the pie. Indeed, key community
members from the US could not afford to go to Wikimania, and did not,
because of the limited funding. We also do not have a strong chapter system
to make up for that shortcoming, where European chapters can, and do,
underwrite their local members with other funds.

I am not against the bulk of the scholarship money going to
underrepresented developing markets and giving new voices a chance to
attend. But I wanted to dispel the myth that Americans are always gorging
at the trough.

https://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Scholarship_selection_process
https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Selection_process


-Andrew

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 6:49 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Pine with all due respect, the USA is not the problem and English Wikipedia
> has been overly subsidised, given way too much attention. Indeed having
> more people from the USA attend Wikimania is not a good value proposition.
> The USA and Britain is overrepresented as it is.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 10 February 2016 at 10:13, Pine W  wrote:
>
> > From a US perspective, even here in the global north we have plenty of
> > students and middle-class participants for whom $1500 in travel, food and
> > lodging plus 5 days away from work, family, or school amounts to a
> > significant or impossible sacrifice.
> >
> > Perhaps someone could tell us the statistics for how many people have
> > attended Wikimania each year who were not WMF employees, FDC or WMF Board
> > members, scholarship recipients, or financially sponsored by WMF
> affiliates
> > or WEF. Of those people who pay 100% of their own costs plus the cost of
> > admission tickets, my guess is that many live within a day's travel time
> by
> > train, car, or bus.
> >
> > I would hypothesize that thematic conferences also have a low percentage
> of
> > people who pay 100% of their own costs, but that regional conferences
> which
> > have lower travel costs for the average attendee receive modestly higher
> > percentages of unsubsidized attendance.
> >
> > It seems to me that WMF finacial support for conferences, including
> > regional and thematic conferences, will continue to be the norm.
> >
> > Whether $1 million is appropriate for Wikimania and whether a more modest
> > budget would be appropriate and feasable are different questions that
> merit
> > careful reflection.
> >
> > Pine
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reducing the net cost of Wikimania

[Andrew Lih]

Béria L,

Yes, I was heartened to see that the formula had changed in 2015. But the
complexity of the algorithm made it hard to discern what the eventual
impact and numbers were for US-based editors. If you have good stats on
this, I’d appreciate a pointer.

Again, I agree that Wikimania should have massive outreach goal with the
bulk of the scholarships should be used to recruit new key members to our
community and evangelizing the mission outside the US. When I was based in
Asia, I was a big advocate for Wikimania being a way to engage new language
groups.

However, I wanted to push back against the oft-heard refrain that the US is
“overly subsidized” when in fact most metrics show this is not the case.

Thanks!
-Andrew

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Béria Lima <berial...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> *For the last few years I’ve held my tongue as American applicants get a
> > fraction of 10% of all the funding for Wikimania scholarships.*
> >
>
> Actually you are looking at the old numbers. Both Wikimanias 2015 and 2016
> uses a new method of selection. Now, the Global North*[1]  *has 25% of all
> scholarships, and the Global South*[2]* has 75%. Now that you have to
> compete with most of the rich countries in the world. And is not all: If
> you get into the final 10% of the "cutoff",your place may be taken away by
> a woman (or transgender) or a Latino, since that is the policy now*[3]*.
>
> And I for one agree with the new policy. The effort made by a European (or
> American, or Canadian) to travel to a Wikimania, is something like one
> month of salary. For a woman from the same place will probably be 2 months
> (pay gap at its finest!) and for a Latino, African, or Asiatic the effort
> starts at 6 months and go on to even a decade*[4]* (A full decade of your
> salary to go to Wikimania).
>
> So no, I don't feel sorry that most of the scholarships don't go to
> Americans, I'm not denying that there is poor people in rich countries but
> the level of poverty is *way* too different.
>
> ​
> Béria L
> ​. de Rodríguez (a Latino Woman )
>
> ___
> *References:*
>
> [1]: Australia, Canada, Israel, Hong Kong, Macau, New Zealand, Japan,
> Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, the United States and all of Europe
> (including Russia, but excluding Turkey) (source
> <https://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_South>)
> [2]: Asia (with the exception of Japan, Hong Kong, Macau, Singapore, South
> Korea and Taiwan), Turkey, Central America, South America, Mexico, Africa,
> and the Middle East (with the exception of Israel) (source
> <https://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Global_South>)
> [3]: For applicants within 10% of the "cutoff", preference will be* first*
> given to the* non-male* applicant, and *secondary* preference to applicants
> from* Latin America*.(source
> <https://wikimania2015.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Selection_process>
> -
> enfasis added by me)
> [4]: Venezuela for example has a exchange rate Bolivar-US dolar of 1026 BSF
> to 1 dolar. Their average salary is 9,500 BSF (about $ 9,00) at that pace
> their probability to attend Wikimania on their own tends to zero. (source
> for the exchange rate <https://dolartoday.com/>)
>
> _____
>
> *​​**Imagine um mundo onde é dada a qualquer pessoa a possibilidade de ter
> livre acesso ao somatório de todo o conhecimento humano. Ajude-nos a
> construir esse sonho.*
>
> 2016-02-10 13:43 GMT-02:00 Andrew Lih <andrew@gmail.com>:
>
> > GerardM,
> >
> > As much as I agree with you on many things related to Wikimania, your
> > statement about en.wp and USA being “over subsidized” is off base.
> >
> > For the last few years I’ve held my tongue as American applicants get a
> > fraction of 10% of all the funding for Wikimania scholarships. That’s
> > because 10% is allocated to all of North America, so US based folks
> compete
> > with Canadians for that small slice of the pie. Indeed, key community
> > members from the US could not afford to go to Wikimania, and did not,
> > because of the limited funding. We also do not have a strong chapter
> system
> > to make up for that shortcoming, where European chapters can, and do,
> > underwrite their local members with other funds.
> >
> > I am not against the bulk of the scholarship money going to
> > underrepresented developing markets and giving new voices a chance to
> > attend. But I wanted to dispel the myth that Americans are always gorging
> > at the trough.
> >
> >
> >
> https://wikimania2013.wikimedia.org/wiki/Scholarships#Scholarship_selection_process
> > https://wikimania2014.wikimedia.org/wiki/S

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Profile of Magnus Manske

[Andrew Lih]

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:39 AM, Anthony Cole  wrote:

> Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple of
> people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're
> persisting with your idée fixe.
>

To be fair, Magnus was addressing more than just the initial complaints
from 2013. He said, “condemning an entire product forever because the first
version didn’t do everything 100% right is just plain stupid.”
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Profile of Magnus Manske

[Andrew Lih]

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:58 AM, Magnus Manske  wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:40 PM Anthony Cole  wrote:
>
> > I notice VE isn't even an option when I log out and edit en.Wikipedia,
> yet
> > above others are saying it is much improved and ready for release. What
> are
> > we waiting for?
> >
>
> This is the thing. The atmosphere has been poisoned against VE, which now
> makes it much harder to get a good product deployed.
>
> But I agree with the sentiment. What ARE we waiting for?
>

Folks, it is ON by default in English Wikipedia for new users who are
logged in. But not for anons.

At the top of the articles now: "Read - Edit source - Edit - View History”

This was turned on late last year as a default for new users, to the
delight of those who do GLAM training and edit-a-thons.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Profile of Magnus Manske

[Andrew Lih]

I cannot speak for Magnus, but there’s a distinction that needs to be made:

Writing, “… all have been resisted by vocal groups of editors, not because
they are a problem, but because they represent change” is not maligning all
editors who complain.

It simply says that those who resist innovation because it is a change from
the status quo, and without solid reasoning, should reconsider. The
detailed analysis of Jonathan Cardy and Risker criticizing VE’s suboptimal
2013 launch are well-informed and legit. But many, unfortunately, don’t
apply such high standards for analysis.

-Andrew


On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 12:13 PM, Pine W  wrote:

> After the assertion "From the Media Viewer, the Visual Editor, to Wikidata
> transclusion, all have been resisted by vocal groups of editors, not
> because they are a problem, but because they represent change," I would
> suggest a very large "citation needed" tag.
>
> Pine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] WikiConference USA in DC

[Andrew Lih]

Just a reminder that WikiConference USA will be from October 9-11, in
Washington DC at the National Archives.

The main McGowan theater sessions will be live streamed via YouTube. If all
goes well, we'll have the other sessions recorded for release later.

Schedule: http://wikiconferenceusa.org/wiki/2015/Schedule

-Andrew
___
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] Media handling is difficult

[Andrew Lih]

FYI, for those interested in uploading to Commons, there was an interesting
presentation at Wikimania about usability testing this.

https://archive.org/details/videoeditserver-96

The short answer to your very valid question -- licenses and copyright are
complicated legal issues when it comes to media. That creeps over into
usability in ways that are probably going to be very hard to solve.

-Andrew


On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Juan de Vojníkov juandevojni...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Hi,

 I would like to ask, if the ease of media handling (images, photographs on
 Wikimedia Commons) is a priority for Wikimedia Foundation? If not, could it
 be a priority? Recently we have seen a big step done for editors =
 VisualEditor. Contributors have no longer study wikicode to be able to
 contribute. That removes one of the technological barriers and it looks its
 a priority for WMF.

 While part of contributing to Wikipedia is still contributing by images. I
 am from Wikimedia Czech republic. We run many projects based on media
 harvest or organizing *low barrier media harvest activities* to bring new
 users to Wikipedia.


 As our newbies are not technologically skilled and not native English
 speakers, there is a big technology block to contribute to Wikipedia with
 ease:

 1) there is no app for mobile phones and tablets for image upload

 2) newbies are lost, when they click on Upload image and they are
 transferred from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons

 3) Wikimedia Commons is in English - foreign language for our participants

 4) biggest language barrier are categories, which are in English only, we
 need to insert name of the category in our mother tongue

 5) Wikimedia Commons environment is still pretty techy

 6) Insert metadata, takes a long time:

 e.g.: you have an image of a cathedral in Des Moines, IW. 3 or 4 times you
 have to insert same information: a) to file name (*Des Moines,
 cathedral.jpg*), b) to file description (*en:** Cathedral in Des Moines,
 Iowa, USA*/*es:* *La catedral de XY en Des Moines, Iowa, EEUU*) and c) to
 the category (*category:Des Moines* or *Churches in Des Moines*,
 *category:Cathedrals
 in Iowa*).

 Its 2015, there are many social projects around us. You can handle images
 much easier on these projects than on mother of all social projects -
 Wikipedia. Big step was done with using images allready present in Commons.
 Could we do something for those, who contributes with their media to
 Wikipedia? Could we do it in one or two years?

 Thank you very much for your concern!

 Regards,

 Juandev
 ___
 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] WMF office location and remodel

[Andrew Lih]

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 5:13 AM, rupert THURNER rupert.thur...@gmail.com
wrote:


 Tim, I am not too sure about this. No single piece of open source software
 comes to my mind when hearing bay area or silicon Valley. And no people
 living there and no company located there. Except the Gnu c compiler and
 may postgres no single piece of open source software came out of the United
 states, at least not without pressure from software from other countries,
 mostly German speaking, Scandinavia, Asia.


Might I suggest, then, that you're not very familiar with open source
software. The basis of modern UNIX is BSD, and its related free license,
out of Berkeley, California. Add to that the output of major firms like Sun
Microsystems (Java) and Google (Android) for their contributions to the
FLOSS landscape, and it's hard to find anywhere else in the world with more
impact.


 Do you not have the impression beeing located in the United states poisons
 the minds of people and has quite a bad influence on the technology output
 of Wmf?


Poisons? Too odd to merit a response.
___
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] A transition and a new chapter.

[Andrew Lih]

To the first Wikimedian to get a tattoo of your item number ... I salute
you.

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com
wrote:

 2015-04-13 21:27 GMT+02:00 Pavel Richter m...@pavelrichter.de:
  Thank you, Q577729!

 [...]

  Q15903779

 (ROFL, you are the cool kids in town ;-) )

 Goodbye Erik, best of luck for your future endeavors.

 C

 ___
 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] New financing model for editations

[Andrew Lih]

Rather than making edit-a-thons more restrictive, our project in DC is
doing the opposite - having a Wikipedia on-ramp available five days a week,
in one of the most high profile places in the US, at the National Archives
(NARA).

Wikipedia Space is a project launching by July 2015 at the NARA Innovation
Hub where any GLAM professional or member of the general public can learn
about Wikipedia and free culture in a standing facility and immediately
contribute content.

Details here: http://www.knightfoundation.org/grants/201450237/

Feel free to contact me for anyone interested in pitching in.

-Andrew



On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 8:52 PM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

 I really like editathons because of the ease with which they can be
 designed to address systemic bias, but I'm not sure having them supported
 by the Foundation is optimal from the perspective of time and money both.

 Therefore, I propose that someone try some editathons where half the
 tickets are auctioned, the other half are raffled, and the Foundation pays
 to support them if and only if the auction fails to pay all of the expenses
 in advance, and then only the difference. This will allow them to become
 more exclusive, but not completely exclusive, and it will incentivize the
 organizing wikipedians by allowing them to pay themselves some contingent
 portion of the proceeds to be negotiated with the Foundation, and which
 could, for example, include an open-ended proportion of auction proceeds.

 Please share your thoughts on this proposal. I am also making diagrams for
 nine of the twelve steps listed on
 http://mediawiki.org/wiki/Accuracy_review
 and its talk page, where I will soon be proposing a different alternate
 funding model to avoid relying on Google Summer of Code. I would also be
 most interested in comments on that. Thank you!
 ___
 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] New financing model for editations

[Andrew Lih]

It may be obvious but it bears pointing out:

There is no ONE right universal model for edit-a-thons.

Think of all the variables -- Wikipedia topic, location, local culture,
language, target constituency, medium/form factor, et al.

It's all about us coherently sharing our best practices and supporting each
other in any way we can.




On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:49 AM, WereSpielChequers 
werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote:

 Wikimedia UK certainly doesn't have a veto power on editathon's in the UK,
 we do try to coordinate in order to minimise clashes, but all we can do
 there is to request that people not have multiple editathons in the same
 city on the same day.  There are things that we have that make editathon's
 easier to do or more inclusive - trained trainers, spare laptops, mobile
 Wifi and a hearing loop for starters, though the price for that support is
 that we do need to collect data for metrics. When someone independently
 organises an event in the UK we are likely to get in touch and offer spare
 laptops and other support.

 Spare laptops in particular are very frequently used at UK editathons, and
 I believe bring a laptop or book one of ours is a much more inclusive way
 to run an event. Than bring a laptop, and when someone discovers that
 they don't have a power lead or they weren't given the password for the
 laptop they brought it is really nice to be able to just hand them a
 laptop. So I always try to have one more than was ordered.

 Regards

 Jonathan Cardy

 GLAM Organiser Wikimedia UK

  after that it started to become impossible to organize an editathon
  without first having an employee agreeing it

 That seems...  wrong.

 For one, that experience may be WMUK's but it's certainly far from
 universal.  WMCA organizes monthly editathons in Montréal, at the very
 least, at zero cost.  (They are organized/moderated by volunteers and
 the venue is provided at no cost by the Bibilothèque et Archive
 Nationale du Québec).  I've never attended, but I'm told that they are
 fairly popular and well-liked.

 If WMUK /chose/ do have a more structured (and more expensive) framework
 to organize similar events themselves, it in no way prevents volunteers
 or other organisms to do so without a penny of Foundation (or chapter)
 funding.
 ___
 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] Announcement: WMF to file suit against the NSA

[Andrew Lih]

Probably a good time for everyone to know about EFF's HTTPS Everywhere:

HTTPS Everywhere is a Firefox, Chrome, and Opera extension that encrypts
your communications with many major websites, making your browsing more
secure. Encrypt the web: Install HTTPS Everywhere today.

https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere



On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 10:02 AM, Johan Jönsson brevlis...@gmail.com
wrote:

 2015-03-10 13:26 GMT+01:00 Comet styles cometsty...@gmail.com:

  for an organization taking on the NSA  for spying..why are we using
  https? doesn't that show that we are already scared of them and
  running with our tail between our legs?
 

 (For non-technical readers: the HTTP protocol is the normal way to send
 around information on the web. HTTPS is the secure way of sending said
 information, adding encryption among other things, to avoid eavesdropping.)

 HTTP traffic can easily be tracked by people sharing the same network, by
 your Internet service provider and so on. If one cares about privacy, HTTPS
 is always important. It's worth noting that the NSA is not the only
 government agency in the world. I'd be even more worried about a number of
 countries where there would be little chance to fight the intruding party
 in the courtroom.

 Side note: you could probably track most HTTPS traffic to Wikipedia as
 well, even if you're not the NSA. Normally you would see that the user has
 accessed Wikipedia, but not which article. A way around that would be to
 let a spider (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_crawler) track the byte
 size of Wikipedia articles, which should be individual enough as soon as
 images are involved and compare it to the size of the page the user just
 accessed. If two articles happen to be of exactly the same size, compare
 with incoming and outgoing wiki links and see if the user accessed any page
 linking to or linked from one the articles to determine which one. But it
 would at least take some sort of effort, and wouldn't be perfect.

 //Johan Jönsson
 --
 ___
 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] Veteran Malayalam Wikipedian BabuG signed off...

[Andrew Lih]

Condolences to the community. I let the Signpost folks know, and there will
be a writeup on this coming shortly.

-Andrew


On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:

 Viswa,

 Thank you so much for letting us know of this editor's inspiring story. We
 are sorry to lose such an exemplary Wikimedian. I hope in his passing he
 had the satisfaction of feeling that in his late years he made the world a
 better place.

 Please contact me off-list if you would like this email to appear in the
 Signpost.

 Condolances to his family and the Malayalam Wikimedia community.

 Pine
 On Mar 5, 2015 7:08 AM, ViswaPrabha (വിശ്വപ്രഭ) vp2...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  Dear Wikimedians all over the world,
 
  One of our stalwarts at ml Wikimedia community, Wikiuser:BabuG
  https://ml.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Babug (
  https://ml.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Babug)  expired yesterday night.
 
  Despite having paralyzed due to a severe stroke and severely affected by
  several subsequent health problems, he was guided to Wikipedia by his
 son,
  Dr. Ajay, another prominent Malayalam Wikipedian, as a possible remedy to
  escape perpetual loneliness.
 
  His real world name was G. Balachandran.He was born on 14th October 1938
 in
  a small village off North Parur, Ernakulam District, Kerala, the
  Southernmost state of India.He  joined the Armed Forces Engineering
 College
  and then continued to serve the Indian Armed forces for long many years.
 
  He started contributing to Wikimedia, particularly to Malayalam
 Wikipedia,
  in the year 2008.
 
  His initial contributions to Malayalam Wikipedia were based upon a
  pulp-converted digital Encyclopedia, released by the Government through
  GFDL licence then.  He continued to create even more full-featured
 articles
  on his own, later. By 2014 October 18 - the day he edited last in
  Wikipedia- he had 1935 full-blown articles initiated and expanded by
  himself in ml.wikipedia.org. Besides, he also contributed more than 350
  images to Wikimedia commons and a handsome  amount of contributions to
  Wikisource, Wikidata and Wiktionary.
 
  He always attributed his renewed energy and life's aspirations to the
  Wikimedia mission, for having returned to a meaningful life after a
 20-year
  long and frustrating solitude while constrained to an immobile chair.
 Ever
  since 2008, he stood up and started walking and moving around. His was an
  extreme example for us in Malayalam WP to showcase how Wikipedia can
 change
  lives.
 
  In almost all our Wikipedia Outreach sessions, we utilized this great
  example to motivate and excite the newcomers to WP.
 
  Tory Read mentioned about BabuG thus, in a document
  http://cis-india.org/internet-governance/india-chronicles.pdf, a
 review
  on the state of Indian Wikimedia Communities, in 2011:
 
  G. Balachandran, a septuagenarian who lives outside of Ernakulum in
 Kerala
   state, said that working on Malayalam Wikipedia helped him recover
 after
  a
   stroke left him paralyzed. “He’s much sharper now,” said his wife
  Jagadamma
   K. “He’s made a lot of new friends, and that’s been good for his
 health.”
 
 
  For us in Malayalam Wikipedia, today is a black day, for having lost a
  great beacon on our voyage to ultimate openness and freedom in knowledge
  and wisdom.
 
 
  Yet, we feel, BabuG has made his life stamped immortal for ever and has
  shown us the pathway we should follow in continuing our humble
  contributions to the ultimate cause of mankind.
 
 
  -ViswaPrabha
  (On behalf of Malayalam Wikimedia Community)
  http://ml.wikipedia.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
 ___
 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] A Listen Button

[Andrew Lih]

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 7:32 AM, Cristian Consonni kikkocrist...@gmail.com
wrote:

 Il 25/Gen/2015 12:18 Martin Kraft martin.kr...@gmx.de ha scritto:
  Did I miss some aspect? Is there a point in converting something visual
 into something visual?

 I have been told that people born deaf find more easy to read things in
 sign language. I imagine it like the difference between reading something
 written in your mother tongue and reading something in another language you
 know.


Yes, I had a deaf student who opened my eyes to this -- he wanted to create
a video site for the deaf that would have signed videos and movies. He had
staffers and volunteers take viral YouTube videos and sign them for the
deaf.

My first question was, wouldn't reading subtitles simply solve the problem?
Why do you need to do ASL versions?

He gave me an annoyed look. It's something the deaf community finds
frustrating to explain to outsiders.

There's a reason its called American SIGN LANGUAGE and not signed English
language. It's a primary language in itself, and reading off the screen is
as inferior an experience as if we read the subtitles with the sound off.

-Andrew
___
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] Audio podcasts from Wikiconference USA

[Andrew Lih]

For those interested in what's going on at Wikiconference USA, Wikipedia
Weekly podcast is back, with two episodes from the conference:


Here's a wrap-up of the first day of the conference, including summary of
keynotes and selected sessions:

https://archive.org/details/wikipedia-weekly-110


In the other, I talk to James Heilman, head of Wiki Project Med Foundation,
on the recent report on the reliability of Wikipedia's medical information,
and why the study is flawed. Includes details of Heilman's correspondence
with the professor behind it.

https://archive.org/details/wikipedia-weekly-111



-Andrew
___
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] UC Berkeley hires Wikipedian in Residence

[Andrew Lih]

This is the only thing approaching a complete list I've seen. Kevin is on
it, but the information is stale.

https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedian_in_Residence

Update please!

-Andrew



On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 9:29 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 19 March 2014 13:11, Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.net
 wrote:
  Neither of these is true: Wikimedia Foundation hired a paid
  Wikipedian-in-Residence at the Belfer Center for Science and
 International
  Affairs, a research center within the John F. Kennedy School of
 Government
  at Harvard University, back in 2012.
 
  I described that hire in a blog post last month:
  http://twkozlowski.net/the-pot-and-the-kettle-the-wikimedia-way/.

 Thanks for highlighting the history. It is amazing how quickly the
 community forgets past projects, or indeed past contributors.

 Fae

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] Let's accept Bitcoin as a donation method

[Andrew Lih]

Jimmy's already noted this is WRONG, but the erroneous Telegraph story
reads:


Wikipedia charity begins accepting Bitcoin donations after co-founder
Jimmy Wales set up a personal account to play around with digital
currency and was swamped with cash

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html

*Jimmy Wales* @jimmy_wales  https://twitter.com/jimmy_wales
7mhttps://twitter.com/jimmy_wales/status/443031310207311872

Yo, @Telegraph https://twitter.com/Telegraph, this story is wrong:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wik
ipedia/10687380/Wales-inundated-with-Wikipedia-donations-after-publishing-personal-Bitcoin-address.html
 ... http://t.co/fM3CTBzRsE No decision has been made for Wikipedia to
accept BTC!





On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Charles Gregory wmau.li...@chuq.netwrote:

 Hi everyone,

 I thought it may be worth pointing out that this conversation has be
 re-opened by Jimmy on
 reddit:
 http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/
 
 http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/201fa6/hello_from_jimmy_wales_of_wikipedia/
 

 On it he states I'm planning to re-open the conversation with the
 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Directors at our next meeting (and before, by
 email) about whether Wikimedia should accept bitcoin.  More info at the
 thread itself.

 Regards,

 Charles / User:Chuq



 On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 10:44 AM, Katie Horn kh...@wikimedia.org wrote:

  That very rough number that Matt threw out there has far less to do with
  the cost of applying human brainpower than it does with the cost of
 taking
  the available brainpower away from things we know are going to
  significantly increase our efficacy. We have several of those things
  looming on the horizon, and we choose to concentrate new development on
  what we know will be the biggest earners out of those.
 
  My understanding (I am no analyst) is that we continue to have a
 difficult
  time finding hard evidence that bitcoin is currently anywhere near the
  other top candidates, so it remains off the roadmap in favor of
  concentrating on solid numbers. If anybody would like to supply us with
  hard figures, we'd certainly be interested in seeing them.
 
  The main reason the expected earnings  one dude's salary calculation of
  worthiness doesn't work here, is that there are four people in
 fundraising
  engineering. The four of us support and maintain all existing payments
  functionality, ensure integrity of the donation pipeline, and do all new
  code development and review. For the sake of the foundation and the
  movement, each one of us has to do significantly better than individually
  break even.
 
  As the fundraising tech lead, I definitely appreciate any outside
 interest
  in potentially helping us out by modifying fundraising code in order to
  support more payment methods, and I would be happy to outline the general
  process of integrating with a new gateway in a way that is consistent
 with
  our current code.
 
  Before I get in to the nitty-gritty, though, I want to be completely
 clear
  on this one point: Even if I had the authority to do so (I do not), there
  is no universe in which I am willing to enable new functionality simply
  because the switch exists. Matt has already done a pretty good job
  outlining the scope of the collective distraction that bitcoin
 represents,
  and that scope extends well beyond tech. In fact, it seems to me that
  producing the actual integration code is the most trivial issue regarding
  bitcoin integration that has been brought up thus far, and I would not be
  pleased to see well-intentioned volunteer time go to waste over hastily
  dismissed blocking issues which exist well outside the purview of the
  fundraising tech team.
 
 
  That said, here is a very general 30,000 foot view of a typical new
 gateway
  integration from a purely technical standpoint:
 
  * Donation Interface[1]: This is the mediawiki extension that initiates
  payments. A new gateway adapter child class will need to be created,
 which
  will run in parallel to the existing enabled gateway adapters, and not
  short-circuit any of the class constraints that have been deliberately
  built in to the gateway adapter parent class. Then, an appropriate form
 (or
  redirect) should be created to handle the user experience, which uses the
  RapidHTML templating system. At the end of it all, after a successful
  donation has been made, an internal donation message should be queued.
  Happily, examples of all the things I just mentioned already exist in
 other
  gateway adapter objects; New gateways are rarely so unusual that we
 haven't
  nearly done it before.
  * Payments Listener[2]: Most payment gateways worth even brief
  consideration, have an optional near-realtime notification system. This
  system tells us when we receive new payments, and existing payments
 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 5:37 AM, Fæ fae...@gmail.com wrote:


 The RFC is non-neutral and unnecessarily complex. With so much
 experience of trying these things, along with full time expertise, I
 would hope for a more sophisticated approach from in-house WMF teams.


It is actually very complex -- legally and technically. And the MPEG-LA
licensors did not gear their licenses or documentation towards
user-generated content, or free culture projects, which makes our job
harder.

-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.netwrote:

 * Andrew Lih wrote:
 BTW, Luis from WMF has put a very lengthy and detailed analysis of the
 legal issues that does help quite a bit, at the end of the RFC:
 
 
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/MP4_Video#Commercial_use_and_h264

 I note that the Wikimedia Foundation does not really have to obtain a
 license to use H.264 encoders and decoders, users could do the format
 conversions elsewhere and the Wikimedia Foundation could then merely
 distribute the files. As the RfC notes, Merely distributing MP4 files
 never requires a patent license. That would spare us problems like the
 secret contract issue.


That would be the status quo. But that's also the problem -- the conversion
tools are lacking and serve as a choke point for contributions. Right now
the most ubiquitous MP4 creation devices (your mobile phone) cannot
directly upload to Commons because of this issue. (Disappointingly, this is
a reason for some Commons users to cheer/vote who simply don't like ease of
video contribution.)

Requiring users to do format conversion on their side also it makes it
extremely hard for remixing, since popular video editors don't ingest Ogg
or WebM as downloaded from Commons. You would have a situation of
MP4-Ogg/WebM conversion; upload to Commons; next user downloads Commons
Ogg/WebM; Ogg/WebM-MP4 conversion; ingest to video editor. That means
there's undesirable generation loss.


 Why does the proposal, instead, suggest the Foundation should engage in
 the practise of, not just mere distribution, but Internet Broadcasting?
 That apparently requires a patent license. For that matter, would users
 who download video automatically obtain Internet Re-Broadcasting rights?


Read the details and you'll see that free (as in beer) Internet Broadcast
video doesn't need a license.

SUMMARY OF AVC/H.264 LICENSE TERMS:
http://www.mpegla.com/main/programs/avc/Documents/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf

In the case of Internet Broadcast AVC Video (AVC Video that is delivered
via the Worldwide Internet to an End User for which the End User does not
pay remuneration for the right to receive or view, i.e., neither
Title-by-Title nor Subscription), there will be no royalty for the life of
the License.



 I do note that according to MPEG LA there are only about 1300 entities
 with relevant license agreements, if putting a H.264 video on my web
 site whether people can download it is Internet Broadcasting and I do
 not obtain an Internet Broadcasting license by pressing the record
 button on my camera, or some other automatic process, then that figure
 is several orders of magnitude too small, or patent holders tolerate a
 lot of infringement (for the moment).


Yes, this is what's confusing about MPEG-LA's stance -- basically it wants
to rich entities with deep pockets near the end of the distribution chain
to pay.

This article might help, but it's still confusing:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-2101-264.html

-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 One thing that hasn't come up in the debate is the relative importance of
 Wikimedia's approach to video, given the existing video ecosystem. YouTube
 enables cc-by uploading and has 4 million videos with a free license, and
 6.5 million videos that are explicitly educational. Are we sure focusing on
 our own base of uploaded videos is the approach best calibrated to serving
 Wikimedia's mission?


In general, downloading videos that other people have posted on YouTube is
not allowed.
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/56100?hl=en

Most folks have concluded it's a violation of YouTube's Terms of Service.

So much for the remix part if you want to do it outside of YouTube's own
editor.

More here in the comments:
https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/27533
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

I'm not sure what debate you're referring to. If it's about whether video
belongs in Wikipedia, I don't think it's even in question.

Wikipedia started in 2001 as all text.

It didn't have photos then, we now have photos.
It didn't have audio then, we now have audio.
It didn't have video then, we now have video (albeit not that much).

Video shouldn't need special justification to be a full-fledged part of
Wikiepdia's content.



On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:12 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:07 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

  One thing that hasn't come up in the debate is the relative importance of
  Wikimedia's approach to video, given the existing video ecosystem.
 YouTube
  enables cc-by uploading and has 4 million videos with a free license, and
  6.5 million videos that are explicitly educational. Are we sure focusing
 on
  our own base of uploaded videos is the approach best calibrated to
 serving
  Wikimedia's mission?
 

 Actually it did come up, allow me to reproduce the comment in a vote posted
 by Brad Patrick (former WMF general counsel):

 I agree that the dominant file format means we need to be able to
 comprehend what is ingested. But it is not okay to ingest and spew using
 that file format if it means we are putting on someone else's intellectual
 property yoke. Commons' great benefit to the world is no-questions-asked
 reusability, and I don't want to see it compromised in this fashion,
 license freebie or otherwise. I'm with User:David
 Gerardhttps://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:David_Gerard
  on this. On the whole it is of far less importance to me as there is no
 guiding principal or idea that WMF is intended to be an *exclusive*
 repository of anything. Others do nothing but video, and that's great. I
 want there to be video, *but it is not part of a grant vision to
 out-YouTube YouTube, or Vimeo, or any other huge site with billions of
 hours of video*. User:Fuzheado
 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fuzheado
  is right - we lack the present toolset to be able to address such volumes
 of video, and I'm not sure that's a bad
 thing.--BradPatrickhttps://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:BradPatrick
  (talk https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:BradPatrick) 14:45,
 16 January 2014 (UTC)

 Emphasis is mine. I'm sure smart people have debated this before, can
 anyone point me to it?

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

Ah. Well if you're not even buying into the legitimacy of photos on
Commons, I'm not sure there's a way to have a productive discussion about
video.

-Andrew



On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:26 PM, Nathan nawr...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:

  I'm not sure what debate you're referring to. If it's about whether video
  belongs in Wikipedia, I don't think it's even in question.
 
  Wikipedia started in 2001 as all text.
 
  It didn't have photos then, we now have photos.
  It didn't have audio then, we now have audio.
  It didn't have video then, we now have video (albeit not that much).
 
  Video shouldn't need special justification to be a full-fledged part of
  Wikiepdia's content.
 
 
 
 More specifically, if growing Commons as a repository for video in the same
 way it is for images is the best use of Wikimedia resources. I'd think
 lobbying Google to be more expansive in its license permissions for cc-by
 YouTube videos, curating existing educational video content, etc. might
 bear more fruit. Not to say that using video from Commons to illustrate
 other projects isn't valuable, but hosting millions of videos not used on
 any projects (as it is with images on Commons) seems like a misuse of time
 and effort given the far more popular alternatives.
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

Great post Manuel, and I wholeheartedly agree, including the final
recommendation. I, instead, voted for full MP4 support on the RfC to draw
the center of gravity towards accepting MP4, but I would be happy even with
a partial solution.

Some points:

1. The video project in English Wikipedia is:
[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video]] We certainly welcome more than
just English Wikipedians there! We've had several university classes use
this, and I think a pretty good set of example videos and guidelines
including many videos shot by journalism and media studies students:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video

2. I talked recently with the Mozilla Popcorn folks, and they seem to have
the best OSS, online video editing system today with Popcorn Maker. You can
actually paste in URLs of Commons video and start splicing them together.
Just make sure to use an Ogg/WebM friendly browser. I encourage you to try
it out.

https://popcorn.webmaker.org/

They said they would be thrilled if Popcorn became part of the editing
solution for Wikimedia. One problem is that they right now only manage an
EDL of edits, so embedding an edited video together requires an online
Javascript environment -- there is no provision for re-compressing and
outputting the video to a standalone Ogg or WebM file. But this is OSS so
adding this functionality should be possible with the right resources.

3. Perhaps we should do several sessions at Wikimedia in succession,
including a workshop on how to shoot and make video? I teach video shooting
and editing to students each year, so this would be quite an easy thing for
me to pitch in on.

-Andrew





On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 6:54 AM, Manuel Schneider 
manuel.schnei...@wikimedia.ch wrote:

 Hi Fabrice,

 interesting question!

 I'd like to remind of a discussion we had at last year's Wikimania in
 Hong Kong concerning tools for the video community.

 Yet we do not really have a video community but scattered small groups
 or individuals doing some work. I try to coordinate this in the
 german-speaking world and we do this via Wikipedia, then there are
 people in the Czech Republic doing videos on national parks, Andrew did
 some great stuff in the US, there is a british initiative as well. We
 all face similar challenges. One things - which is off-topic here - is
 that I have in mind to connect these groups to an internationl video
 community, maybe by having a WikiVideo (or whatever the name might be)
 project.

 But back to the RfC: One of the challenges is that we need a solution for

 * storing the raw video material allowing people to re-use, re-edit
 etc., also most volunteers don't have the storage capacity to store all
 their raw material

 * collaborative editing - hard to do technically and it mostly implies
 that raw material is being shared - hard for people that can meet each
 other as these files are big, fast storage is needed etc. and it is even
 harder for people working online

 * upload of high-quality, finished video projects is a pain. They mostly
 have more than 1 GB, you need to have another server to upload and share
 it, make a bug report, find a server admin who downloads and imports it
 etc.

 My idea which we talked about briefly at Wikimania was a server where
 people could upload there raw material, it gets transcoded into smaller
 proxy clips everyone can easily download, edit and then upload the EDL
 (edit decision list = video editing project file, which just holds the
 operations). The server would then use the EDL on the raw material
 stored there and render the final video. The upload process can then be
 automated between this server and Commons.

 The reason this idea was dismissed is the core of this RfC: patent
 trolling etc. on H.264 codecs etc. which we would need to allow as raw
 material.

 So my take on this topic is a compromise:

 * allow MP4 / H.264 as a source codec

 * deliver everything in WebM / Ogg Theora (or other free codecs)

 Especially with WebM I see no reason why people really need H.264. Ogg
 Theora is somewhat exotic but WebM isn't.
 And once we have solved the legal problem around this RfC nothing is
 stoping us to implement the video editing server, right?


 /Manuel
 --
 Wikimedia CH - Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
 Lausanne, +41 (21) 34066-22 - www.wikimedia.ch

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

James,

This is the first time I've ever heard the phrase Wiktionary headwords in
my life :)

I'm partial, but there's a very strong case that video in Wikipedia has a
large impact and interest level that justifies this much time on it.

-Andrew



On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 7:16 AM, James Salsman jsals...@gmail.com wrote:

 Why would we promote patent- and secrecy-encumbered formats when Google has
 spent so much on opening WebM?

 Also, why does the Multimedia Team care about video when most Wiktionary
 headwords don't have uploaded audio exemplars yet?

 Where are our priorities?
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

As much as I am pushing for MP4 adoption in Wikimedia to help our lagging
video efforts, MPEG-4 patent holders/licensors are not helping their case:

1. The consumer licensing agreement from ATT is scary and weird, and
Geni's first NO vote has set the tone for many to follow.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_comment/MP4_Video#No_MP4_support

2. The secrecy around the the full license agreements cannot be disclosed
in public sounds bad and we'd have to trust WMF's legal team to find it
acceptable. Wikimedians hate non transparency. Some folks are voting NO
because of this.

3. The CNET interview with MPEG-LA's legal folks seems to indicate a
bizarre stance: Yes, they intentionally have scary, inconsistent and
confusing licensing terms. This is to make sure people with deep pockets
wind up paying the patent pool lots of money. For smaller users? Those
onerous terms sound like they apply to you but you can disregard them. This
is NOT a good state of affairs for a conscientious, detail-oriented free
culture contributors.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-2101-264.html

4. One of the better resources to explains things is in this post from
LibreVideo.org, but even then there are many unanswered questions:
http://www.librevideo.org/blog/2010/06/14/mpeg-la-answers-some-questions-about-avch-264-licensing/

-Andrew



On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 5:28 AM, Bjoern Hoehrmann derhoe...@gmx.net wrote:

 * Fabrice Florin wrote:
 The Wikimedia Foundation's multimedia team (1) seeks your guidance on a
 proposal to support the MP4 video format. As you know, this digital
 video standard is used widely around the world to record, edit and watch
 videos on mobile phones, desktop computers and home video devices. It is
 also known as H.264/MPEG-4 or AVC. (2)

 Actually, MP4 is a container format and H.264 a video codec, and it is
 quite normal to use variants of H.264 with other container formats like
 AVI. Likewise, MP4 does not imply using AAC as audio codec, MP3 could
 be used instead, for instance. An analysis why AAC is being proposed may
 be useful here.

 However, MP4 is a patent-encumbered format, and using a proprietary
 format would be a departure from our current practice of only supporting
 open formats on our sites -- even though the licenses appear to have
 acceptable legal terms, with only a small fee required.

 https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=114053933 notes Though
 the full license agreements cannot be disclosed in public. That is not
 very helpful in analysing claims later on like Merely distributing MP4
 files never requires a patent license.

 What is the exact language to be used to inform anyone handling H.264
 video downloaded from Wikimedia Foundation servers of their rights and
 restrictions, specifically with regards to the relevant patent porfolio?
 Making it abundantly clear what users can and cannot do with such files
 should be considered a pre-condition for considering such a proposal.
 --
 Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjo...@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
 Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Emmanuel Engelhart kel...@kiwix.orgwrote:

 Le 16/01/2014 12:54, Manuel Schneider a écrit :
  The reason this idea was dismissed is the core of this RfC: patent
  trolling etc. on H.264 codecs etc. which we would need to allow as raw
  material.

 We have now a pretty good support of TIFF for pictures and FLAC for
 audio streams; but there is still no solution to store lossless (raw)
 video material. This problem is a real one like have underlined Manuel.

 The following Wikipedia article proposes a list of lossless video codecs:
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_codecs#Lossless_compression_2

 Dirac, a free codec developed by the BBC, seems to be a good solution.
 Do people have some experiences with Dirac?


I actually looked into this last year, but it seems there has been little
to no development of this since two years ago.

-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

You know I think you're awesome David, so I take your words to heart.
You're right about the magnitude of the decision.

I can see how backdoored was not meant to ascribe a motive or
underhandedness, but to alert the community that we're allowing a practice
we may not completely grasp in terms of a culture change.

Instead, I'd neutralize backdoored to something like, unwittingly shifting
our cherished values for the worse.

I voted to go with MP4 but my skepticism is high -- I'm still not satisfied
we have deciphered all the legal aspects to our satisfaction:
- Confusing consumer electronics MPEG-4 ATT license for personal and
non-commercial activity as brought up by User:Geni
- Secret non-public licenses WMF would need to purchase, and the community
wouldn't understand
- What happens after 2016 when the secret license fees could arbitrarily
rise?
- What happens with CC-BY-SA MPEG-4 content downloaded from Commons if it's
used in a commercial setting? Have we sprung a surprise gotcha on creators
of derivative works?

These are not easy, but I'd like to explore them, cautiously, even for a
limited trial.

-Andrew



On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:41 AM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 16 January 2014 15:36, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:
  On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  This proposal asks to move to a free as in beer model, where content
 will
  be free to view, but not necessarily to reuse (and with the opaque
 license,
  it may not even be possible to tell). We could choose to make that
 change,
  but it is a major change to the founding principles of what we do.  As
 such
  it should be discussed directly and across all projects as such a major
  change, and not backdoored through a vote that is on its surface a
 question
  about format support.

  As much as I hate how MPEG-LA and MPEG-4 creates a non-free climate for
 our
  video, it's unfair to use backdoor to characterize intent of either
  community members or WMF employees in this area.


 I think it's quite fair to note, loudly and often, that *functionally*
 it creates a backdoor for nonfree content.

 This is a major, major change, being posited as allowing a format.

 Furthermore, this has been discussed before, and the proponents *are
 fully aware* that it is a major, major change that they are positing
 as allowing a format.

 So claiming that it's assuming bad faith to notice this and say so
 comes across as disingenuous.


 - d.

 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote:


 
  So claiming that it's assuming bad faith to notice this and say so
  comes across as disingenuous.
 

 That is exactly my intent. I don't mean to imply WMF is acting with malice
 here. However, in this instance, a technological change would cause a
 significant shift in the principles and ethics behind what we do. So rather
 than focusing on technology, the question should be whether free content
 should be removed as a fundamental principle of our movement. Functionally,
 that is what this proposal, if implemented, would do.

 Otherwise, exactly as David explained, corrosion to that principle slips in
 by the back door, whether by accident or design. If we want to ask that
 question, ask it directly.

 Thanks for the clarification. I hereby withdraw my issue about motives.

It is indeed a good question. It just stinks it's happening in so many
places :)

There is a video RFC office hours today (Thursday) at 1900 UTC! Please do
join.

https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/IRC_office_hours#Upcoming_office_hours

Unfortunately I have another engagement or I'd absolutely be there.

-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 10:28 AM, Lionel Allorge 
lionel.allo...@lunerouge.org wrote:

 Hi,

 On the contrary, we should encourage people to edit their videos with
 tutorials and to render the final edit in a free file format.


Agree. As part of Wiki Makes Video, we've done some of this already,
including videos about making videos:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Wiki_Makes_Video/Shoot

I welcome other contributions and feedback to the project.

-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] RfC: Should we support MP4 Video on our sites?

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:14 AM, Todd Allen toddmal...@gmail.com wrote:

 There aren't two principles in conflict here.

 This proposal asks to move to a free as in beer model, where content will
 be free to view, but not necessarily to reuse (and with the opaque license,
 it may not even be possible to tell). We could choose to make that change,
 but it is a major change to the founding principles of what we do.  As such
 it should be discussed directly and across all projects as such a major
 change, and not backdoored through a vote that is on its surface a question
 about format support.


As much as I hate how MPEG-LA and MPEG-4 creates a non-free climate for our
video, it's unfair to use backdoor to characterize intent of either
community members or WMF employees in this area.

Video has been a big shortcoming in Wikipedia and in the FLOSS community in
general. Overcoming means we need to consider the unique nature of the
problem with some possible new solutions. That's not backdooring -- that's
directly addressing the needs of content creation given the current legal
and IP situation.

Let's debate the merits of the case and not assume bad faith of the folks
putting it forward.

-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)

[Andrew Lih]

Ting and Christophe,

Glad to hear we are moving forward on finding more sophisticated ways of
thinking about paid editing. At least for the English Wikipedians I've
talked to, many are pleasantly surprised that the European editions are
able to find a cooperative relationship with paid, corporate entities. The
Signpost article out today details some of that, but it merits a
comprehensive inventory and study to compare best practices. (Of course,
the argument can always be made about English Wikipedia as a weird special
case because of its profile and large community. I intentionally choose not
to use the horrible word exceptionalism!)

In last night's episode of Wikipedia Weekly podcast, we talked about this
as well [1]. In general, there are multiple parameters regarding the issue
of COI editing that goes beyond pay.

1. Pay
2. Neutrality
3. Advocacy
4. Transparency

Even then, the term advocacy is an imprecise and nearly useless term. Are
you advocating for a client? Are you advocating for the public good? Same
word, completely different motivations. So paid advocacy as a phrase,
uncontextualized, is not useful.

That's why I really like the GLAM use of the phrase of choosing to work
with like minded institutions. A national museum with editorial
independence is a good like-minded institution for the Wikimedia community.
A think tank that works to convince the public that global warming is a
myth… not so much.

If an institution is not like-minded, then the process of educating and
working with them with appropriate strict guidelines is a viable solution.
We see that this can work with the examples of Swedish and German
Wikipedias (and, it seems, others)

Back to the four factors above: You can have paid, neutral, transparent
editors that advocate for something good -- like better public access to
public records. GLAM Wikipedians-in-residence are a good example of this,
where they ensure that the interests of the public and Wikipedia's
principles come first. So their advocacy is for the principles of better
public knowledge, and a full time employee is working on it. This is a 4x
positive outcome, even though the words paid and advocacy are used.

On the other hand, in the case of Wiki-PR: it's editing for pay, without
transparency, without neutrality and advocating for a paying customer's
benefit. That's a quadruple no-no. This type of activity must be banned.
But if there is a middle way on this, in working with corporations in a
straightforward way, we would be silly not to investigate this, as certain
Wikipedia editions already show that it is possible.

I've highlighted in the past that we have systemic problems in Wikipedia
with unpaid editors resulting in persistent non-neutral content. The
university and college articles are the best (ie. worst) examples of this
-- these always read like brochures that brag about the top accomplishments
and rankings of a university because the number of alumni and students that
put in positive statements far outnumber anyone who could pull them back
into neutral territory. Unpaid, non-neutral, alma mater-advocacy is rampant
and persistent.

I hope we can start a longer dialogue about this at Wikimania. I'd be happy
to propose not just a session, but an entire track at Wikimania to address
this, including brainstorming/sharing sessions to get more views from other
language editions.

-Andrew

[1] Wikipedia Weekly episode 108 -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0698SX41VsE
Discussion of paid editing at 33 minutes into the podcast



On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 7:40 AM, Ting Chen wing.phil...@gmx.de wrote:

 Hello dear all,

 I would like to be more cautious about the difference between the good
 paid editing and the bad paid advocacy.

 There are two reasons why I don't want to separate in this way.

 First of there is no clear boundary between the good and bad like
 black and white. There is a gradient of grey between the two. And that
 gradient is not a narrow one but a very broad one. And it depends from the
 perspective of the people who look upon the matter. For one maybe a
 behavior is the dark white but for the other one it may be a bright black.

 Second I want to especially respond to the idea that Erik brought up: an
 organization that hire people to write qualified articles. I wrote in the
 other mail that I believe paid editing changes the collaboratory nature of
 our projects but did not really elaborate on why I think so. I want to do
 this now. Let me construct an example to emphasize why I think so. I will
 now take an example which leaves almost no room for interpretation about
 black and white: the theoretical physics. Let's say there is a charitable
 non-profit organization that hires reknowned theoretical physicists to
 write Wikipedia articles. So they pay 10.000 Dollar to Bryce DeWitt (I
 know, he is dead, I just don't want to name any living people) to write
 about field theory, or John Wheeler to write about general relativity, and
 so on and so 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Copyright infringement - The real elephant in the room

[Andrew Lih]

FYI, on the last Wikipedia Weekly podcast, we talked with Sage Ross about
the plagiarism issue, and he walked through the study with some very
interesting insights. Video here, and the discussion started at 11 minutes,
30 seconds into the podcast.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOgYytn2JRk

-Andrew



On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 11:40 PM, James Heilman jmh...@gmail.com wrote:

  The Wikimedia Foundation needs to wake up and deal with the real tech
  elephant in the room. Our primary issue is not a lack of FLOW, a lack
 of a
  visual editor, or a lack of a rapidly expanding education program.
 
  Our biggest issue is copyright infringement. We have had the Indian
  program, we have had issues with the Education program, and I have today
  come across a user who has made nearly 20,000 edits to 1,742 article
 since
  2006 which appear to be nearly all copy and pasted from the sources he
 has
  used.
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DrMicro#Copyright_infringement
  This
  has seriously shaken my faith in Wikipedia.
 
  This is especially devastating as there is a tech solution that would
 have
  prevented it. The efforts are being worked on by volunteers here
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Turnitin and has been since at
  least March of 2012. We NEED all tech resource at the foundation thrown
 at
  this project. Other less important project like FLOW and the visual
 editor
  need to be put on hold to develop this tool.
 

 Relevant info on the subject of copyvio is the recent plagiarism study by
 the Education Program team. They looked different types of users (students,
 newbies, experienced editors, admins) and compared them. Results were
 published on Meta at

 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Plagiarism_on_the_English_Wikipediaand
 also discussed in the last WMF Metrics  Activities meeting:
 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/2013-11-07

 AFAIK this is the best data we have about how often different kinds of
 editors close paraphrase or outright copy/paste.
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] Planned school curriculum by MPAA

[Andrew Lih]

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:40 AM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 25 September 2013 19:33, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:

  It has something to do with countering falsehoods and educating folks
 about
  the full range of content rights.
 
  Their 2nd grade materials state:
  Property comes in many forms: when we buy a book, we own that book. It’s
  our property, but we don’t own the right to reproduce that book and then
  sell it or give it away. That’s stealing.
 
  Um, no. A Creative Commons SA book,


 The course covers creative commons.


Not that I can see. Creative Commons in not in the lesson plan for 2nd
graders.

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2013/09/Grade-2-Copyright-Lesson.pdf

Creative Commons is introduced in 5th grade.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
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] Planned school curriculum by MPAA

[Andrew Lih]

I disagree that this is simply political.

It is very much a culture of ownership -- and a corporate one at that --
being instituted earlier to American kids.

If you remember, it was exactly this problem that inspired Lawrence Lessig
to start Creative Commons in the first place. He observed that there was a
critical inflection point -- when kids are first taught to share and
cooperate and then are flipped to hoard and restrict.

This amplifies hoarding and restricting at the same time kids are taught to
share. I'm glad I moved out of California before this propaganda was
introduced to my kids.

-Andrew





On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 1:29 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerro...@gmail.com wrote:

 What exactly does this have to do with the WMF? Just because we encourage
 open sharing of data doesn't mean we need to comment on every political
 debate that shows up on the news.

 *-- *
 *Tyler Romeo*
 Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2016
 Major in Computer Science


 On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 1:21 PM, geni geni...@gmail.com wrote:

  On 24 September 2013 17:42, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/09/mpaa-school-propaganda/
  
   “This thinly disguised corporate propaganda is inaccurate and
   inappropriate,” says Mitch Stoltz, an intellectual property attorney
   with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who reviewed the material at
   WIRED’s request.
  
   “It suggests, falsely, that ideas are property and that building on
   others’ ideas always requires permission,” Stoltz says. “The
   overriding message of this curriculum is that students’ time should be
   consumed not in creating but in worrying about their impact on
   corporate profits.”
  
  
   I suggest we see if WMF commenting, possibly in a blog post or
   similar, would help avert such anti-sharing foolishness.
  
  
   - d.
  
 
  Might not be a great idea
  Its an improvement on previous attempts (to start with It doesn't appear
 to
  violate the GFDL) and we would actually benefit from our uploaders
 having a
  working knowledge of copyright. Knowing all the exceptions is something
  best left to more experienced users.
 
  --
  geni
  ___
  Wikimedia-l mailing list
  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
 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
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] Planned school curriculum by MPAA

[Andrew Lih]

It has something to do with countering falsehoods and educating folks about
the full range of content rights.

Their 2nd grade materials state:
Property comes in many forms: when we buy a book, we own that book. It’s
our property, but we don’t own the right to reproduce that book and then
sell it or give it away. That’s stealing.

Um, no. A Creative Commons SA book, a public domain work or expired
copyright work can indeed be reproduced. And it's not stealing.

We are careful to acknowledge the work of authors and creators and respect
their ownership. We recognize that it’s hard work to produce something, and
we want to get paid for our work.

No, not all people want to get paid for their work.


I'd be OK if they simply gave some space in the training materials to talk
about public domain, free licenses and fair use. That's not likely to
happen given who's in control of those lesson plans.





On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 1:45 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerro...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:

  I disagree that this is simply political.


 This doesn't answer my original question. What does this have to do with
 WMF? Wikipedia does not own any public schools in California, nor will
 Wikipedia be affected by this curriculum should it be implemented. The only
 similarity is that is has something to do with knowledge, which is
 extremely vague.

 *-- *
 *Tyler Romeo*
 Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2016
 Major in Computer Science
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] Planned school curriculum by MPAA

[Andrew Lih]

The California school system is the back yard (actually front yard) of both
Wikimedia Foundation and Creative Commons.

From the message on the web site, the WMF is a nonprofit charitable
organization dedicated to encouraging the growth, development and
distribution of free, multilingual, educational content, and to providing
the full content of these wiki-based projects to the public free of charge.

Inside a California public school, the WMF should indeed have an interest
in making sure that students using Wikipedia don't think to themselves that
using such material is stealing and that someone is expecting to be
paid.




On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 3:09 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerro...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 2:33 PM, Andrew Lih andrew@gmail.com wrote:

  I'd be OK if they simply gave some space in the training materials to
 talk
  about public domain, free licenses and fair use. That's not likely to
  happen given who's in control of those lesson plans.
 

 You're still just arguing about the correctness of the material. I agree
 that this curriculum is stupid and misleading, but that doesn't explain why
 the WMF should care enough to make a statement, or even continue
 discussion, about it.

 *-- *
 *Tyler Romeo*
 Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2016
 Major in Computer Science
 ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list
 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
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] AffComs $40,000 Hong Kong junket

[Andrew Lih]

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote:

 ...Paris and London are both more expensive cities that Hong Kong, so I'd
 expect the daily rate here to be closer to $130/night, and ideally less
 than that where bookings are made sufficiently in advance.


Not to be a nit, but I wanted to point out that this biannual study shows
otherwise.

On this list of most expensive cities for hotel rooms, Hong Kong is #8,
Paris is #9, and London is not in the top 10.

http://travel.cnn.com/explorations/escape/costliest-hotels-list-637685

I don't have a viewpoint either way on this issue, but just thought
Wikipedians in favor of verification would like to know.

-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AffComs $40,000 Hong Kong junket

[Andrew Lih]

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 2:30 PM, Russavia russavia.wikipe...@gmail.comwrote:


 That list is for 5 star hotels; something that I hope that donor money
 is never put towards covering the cost of; regardlessofwho itis.


I don't see any indication that list is for 5 star hotels.

Also, I'm not sure you'd be happy hearing this, but it's not a new
phenomenon -- donor money has been spent on hotel rooms in this price range
for many years now.



 The Tsim Sha Tsui area of Hong Kong around the university is packed
 jam of decent lodgings, that are a far sight cheaper than the $200 per
 night being budgeted for at the Regent.


Er, unfortunately it's a real mixed bag, because the TST area is well known
for its hourly hotels (yes, it's what you think they are) and
tenement-style accommodations that are hygienically challenged. I'm not
saying good budget lodging cannot be done, but it's certainly not a target
rich environment.

-Andrew
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l