Re: [Wikimedia-l] Which script oral language will use anyway?

[Jeff Hawke]

Suhashih

You are right that this could be a controversial choice -- indeed it is
inherently political and there is no way of avoiding that fact.  So where
will the decision be taken, on what grounds and by what athority?

Jeff

On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 8:26 PM Subhashish Panigrahi 
wrote:

> Dear Wikimedians,
>
> Some of you might be recovering from the Wikimania fatigue. Those of you
> who have already recovered, I wanted to pick your brain about something
> that came up multiple times during discussions but none really seem to have
> a clear answer.
>
> Which script (writing system) an oral language speaker would use for
> creating an entry on (gateway [1]) projects like Wiktionary or Wikibooks or
> even uploading a list of words on Commons using a tool like Lingua Libre?
> Will it be the script used for the official language of the region where
> the former language is from?[2] This is a bit controversial as native
> speakers of many indigenous languages would see this as a form of
> colonization. Will it be the w:International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)? This
> is probably the least controversial but a common and average user might not
> be able to read IPA as the latter was created by linguists and was created
> for linguistic and scholarly studies rather than for everyday use.
>
> Wikimedians who are native speakers of languages with less written/recorded
> documentation and individuals who work on such languages are more
> encouraged to share their inputs based on past experience.
>
> 1. Gateway project: This is a made-up term to define the Wikimedia projects
> that are more welcoming to newbies and do not require stringent citation as
> almost all oral languages would lack that. It was fascinating to see Amir
> challenging that it only takes about 30 seconds to add an entry to
> Wiktionary (
>
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Amir_Aharoni_demonstrating_how_to_add_an_entry_to_Wiktionary_in_any_language_to_Ingrid_Cumming,_Wikimania_2019,_Stockholm,_Sweden.jpg
> )
>
> Subhashish
> ___
> 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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Jeff Hawke]

Dariusz

It seems very likely that the majority of the 60,000 contributors you
mention are there with the intention of building an encyclopaedia based on
a neutral point of view achieved by verifiable information attributed to
reliable independent sources and disseminated under a free licence.  Since
there are recommendations that would challenge every single part of that
intent, it seems reasonable to assume that some non-trivial proportion of
the volunteer workforce will not wish to continue to participate in a
project that has so dramatically changed its entire raison d'etre.

Jeff
___
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] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Jeff Hawke]

] Group
> members come from different parts of the movement, e.g. from different
> regions and languages, from individual contributors and organized groups,
> and with different volunteer and staff roles, incl. Wikimedia Foundation
> staff and board.
>
> The groups are doing an amazing job. With many of them being volunteers, or
> doing this work on top of their regular jobs, creating the draft
> recommendations is a huge achievement. They first needed to form, storm and
> norm as a group and figure out how to best work together across time zones,
> languages, and contexts. They then took a deep dive into the substance and
> identified the scope of their work and the specific questions to tackle for
> us as a movement to advance in our strategic direction. The development of
> recommendations has started in spring this year, and – aside from many
> online calls, asynchronous work and scarce in-person meetings – included
> incorporating community conversations and external expertise. It is only to
> the hard work of these groups that we finally have something tangible in
> front of us that we can all react to and help further improve to build our
> future together.
>
> Please join us in thanking, celebrating and supporting them, rather than
> rushing to conclusions or arguing  over details. Please contribute in good
> faith, and in a constructive way.
>
> Let me know if you have further questions.
>
> Best wishes,
> Nicole
>
> [1]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/July_2018_-_Board_of_Trustees_participation_in_the_Movement_Strategy_Process
> [2]
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Procedures
>
> On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 at 13:13, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
>
> > And this is the core problem of the whole process (which has been pointed
> > out by multiple people from the very beginning)
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 12:27 PM Jeff Hawke 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Andy
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:41 PM Andy Mabbett <
> a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 09:55, Jeff Hawke 
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > the WG then collate them and decide the final form of the
> > > > > recommendations, to be implemented by the WMF
> > > >
> > > > This seems to be missing a rather crucial intermediate step; the one
> > > > where the recommendations are accepted, or not, by the wider
> Wikimedia
> > > > community.
> > > >
> > >
> > >  That step is not mentioned at
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_steps_will_take_place_in_the_next_few_months_to_put_a_decision-making_process_in_place
> > > ?
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > > ___
> > > 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>
>
>
>
> --
> Nicole Ebber
> Adviser International Relations
> Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
> https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> ___
> 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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Jeff Hawke]

t; > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are
> > > here!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It is disturbing that you would even consider overriding the community
> in
> > > such a massive way.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 23, 2019, at 9:44 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
> > >
> > > > The board will be discussing this of course. We do not have a group
> > > > position at this point in time.
> > > >
> > > > J
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:47 PM Jeff Hawke  >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> James
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks for that.  As a member of the Board, would you clarify the
> > > Board's
> > > >> position on whether it is prepared to see the final Recommendations
> > > >> implemented irrespective of any disagreement from the community?
> > > >>
> > > >> Jeff
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:05 PM James Heilman 
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> I for one do not agree with Jan-Bart's prior position.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> James
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 4:40 AM Jeff Hawke <
> geoffey.ha...@gmail.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Paulo,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia
> > > community
> > > >>>> does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall
> that
> > > >> just
> > > >>>> five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board,
> > > >>> expressed
> > > >>>> the opinion
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> > > >>>> over
> > > >>>> a much less dramatic change.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> > > >>>> acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part
> of
> > > >> this
> > > >>>> next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to
> > > >> take a
> > > >>>> wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you
> > have
> > > >> to
> > > >>>> let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next
> > step
> > > >>> when
> > > >>>> needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you
> > > will
> > > >>>> return when the time is right.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Jeff
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > > >>>> paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the
> Wikimedia
> > > >>>>> community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the
> WGs
> > > >>> 8and
> > > >>>>> their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around
> > > >>> December.
> > > >>>>> Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will
> > > >> only
> > > >>> be
> > > >>>>> dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in
> > the
> > > >>>>> process of implementation.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the
> > > >>>> Wikimedia
> > > >>>>> community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass
> > all
> > > >>> the
> > > >>>>> way till implementation phase.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Paulo
> > > >>>>>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Jeff Hawke]

James

Thanks for that.  As a member of the Board, would you clarify the Board's
position on whether it is prepared to see the final Recommendations
implemented irrespective of any disagreement from the community?

Jeff

On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:05 PM James Heilman  wrote:

> I for one do not agree with Jan-Bart's prior position.
>
> James
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 4:40 AM Jeff Hawke 
> wrote:
>
> > Paulo,
> >
> > You suggest that "things will not get pretty if the Wikimedia community
> > does not approve some of the recommendations".  You may recall that just
> > five years ago, Jan-Bart de Vreede, then chair of the WMF Board,
> expressed
> > the opinion
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)=prev=9585319
> > over
> > a much less dramatic change.
> >
> > > All of this is going to require change, change that might not be
> > acceptable to some of you. I hope that all of you will be a part of this
> > next step in our evolution. But I understand that if you decide to take a
> > wiki-break, that might be the way things have to be. Even so, you have to
> > let the Foundation do its work and allow us all to take that next step
> when
> > needed. I can only hope that your break is temporary, and that you will
> > return when the time is right.
> >
> > I presume this is a good summary of the WMF position today.
> >
> > Jeff
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 12:06 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
> > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > If I've well understood the timeline, all input from the Wikimedia
> > > community ceases in mid September. Then it's all defined by the WGs
> 8and
> > > their advisors), and eventually decided upon by the BoT around
> December.
> > > Therefore, after 15 September or so, the Wikimedia community will only
> be
> > > dealing with those recommendations again when they are already in the
> > > process of implementation.
> > >
> > > It's quite easy to predict that things will not get pretty if the
> > Wikimedia
> > > community does not approve some of the recommendations that pass all
> the
> > > way till implementation phase.
> > >
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Nicole Ebber  escreveu no dia quinta,
> > > 22/08/2019
> > > à(s) 11:58:
> > >
> > > > Dear all,
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for your engagement and input. It’s been great seeing so
> much
> > > > attention on movement strategy and collaborative efforts for building
> > our
> > > > future. Here are a couple of follow up responses and clarifications.
> > > >
> > > > DRAFTS
> > > > As pointed out in my previous email, the documents we recently shared
> > are
> > > > recommendation drafts. They are not final, and not complete, but
> > working
> > > > documents that are currently being refined by the working groups.
> Some
> > > > answers still read like stubs that are longing for further
> development,
> > > > others are very detailed and will become more focused over the next
> few
> > > > weeks. We still decided to publish everything at once, to give
> > everyone a
> > > > full picture of the variety of topics and offer an insight into
> > multiple
> > > > progress levels.
> > > >
> > > > I would also like to reiterate that movement values, priorities and
> > > > community conversation processes are high on our radar. A
> > recommendation
> > > to
> > > > change the existing license model, for example, will not just go
> > through
> > > a
> > > > quick approval process, but lead to a deeper exploration into the
> > > reasoning
> > > > behind it: What problems are we trying to tackle, and what could be
> > ways
> > > to
> > > > mitigate them? Such recommendation would then rather suggest to look
> > into
> > > > different measures to ensure indigenous knowledge is included in the
> > > > Wikimedia ecosystem, deploy research and further consultation,
> instead
> > of
> > > > rushing to a quick fix.
> > > >
> > > > INTEGRATION
> > > > The working groups are taking input that they gathered at Wikimania
> and
> > > via
> > > > different movement channels and incorporating it into the next
> > iteration
> > > of
> > > > their re

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Jeff Hawke]

ether to work to develop a
> more
> > coherent set of recommendations. The group will be supported by
> > facilitators and external advice, as well as the core team. We have also
> > invited María Sefidari, Katherine Maher, Ryan Merkley, Valerie D’Costa
> > (Wikimedia Foundation) and Abraham Taherivand (Wikimedia Deutschland) to
> > the sprint. They contribute expertise and experience from their work and
> > leadership in the movement and beyond. They will be active listeners and
> > can challenge recommendations by pointing out risks and consequences on
> the
> > organizational and movement level. They also participate as the
> > representatives of organizations that may be impacted by the
> > recommendations. Involving them early is important so they can anticipate
> > any possible changes for their staff and programs, and plan for
> > implementation.
> >
> > Our aim is to release recommendations in November 2019, and present them
> to
> > the Board of Trustees for approval in December. We will need the legal
> > authority of the board for some of the recommendations, while others will
> > then be further delegated to other community mechanisms and structures
> for
> > approval or further consultation.[1] There will be additional public
> > consultation activities around implementation that will be discussed and
> > owned across the movement.
> >
> > WORKING GROUPS
> > We have chosen the working group model to ensure that the process that
> > embarks to make significant changes to our movement structures is owned
> by
> > the community. Members of the nine working group were selected by a
> > steering committee and the groups were established in July 2019.[2] Group
> > members come from different parts of the movement, e.g. from different
> > regions and languages, from individual contributors and organized groups,
> > and with different volunteer and staff roles, incl. Wikimedia Foundation
> > staff and board.
> >
> > The groups are doing an amazing job. With many of them being volunteers,
> or
> > doing this work on top of their regular jobs, creating the draft
> > recommendations is a huge achievement. They first needed to form, storm
> and
> > norm as a group and figure out how to best work together across time
> zones,
> > languages, and contexts. They then took a deep dive into the substance
> and
> > identified the scope of their work and the specific questions to tackle
> for
> > us as a movement to advance in our strategic direction. The development
> of
> > recommendations has started in spring this year, and – aside from many
> > online calls, asynchronous work and scarce in-person meetings – included
> > incorporating community conversations and external expertise. It is only
> to
> > the hard work of these groups that we finally have something tangible in
> > front of us that we can all react to and help further improve to build
> our
> > future together.
> >
> > Please join us in thanking, celebrating and supporting them, rather than
> > rushing to conclusions or arguing  over details. Please contribute in
> good
> > faith, and in a constructive way.
> >
> > Let me know if you have further questions.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> > Nicole
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/July_2018_-_Board_of_Trustees_participation_in_the_Movement_Strategy_Process
> > [2]
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Procedures
> >
> > On Wed, 21 Aug 2019 at 13:13, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:
> >
> > > And this is the core problem of the whole process (which has been
> pointed
> > > out by multiple people from the very beginning)
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Yaroslav
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 12:27 PM Jeff Hawke 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Andy
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:41 PM Andy Mabbett <
> > a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 09:55, Jeff Hawke 
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > the WG then collate them and decide the final form of the
> > > > > > recommendations, to be implemented by the WMF
> > > > >
> > > > > This seems to be missing a rather crucial intermediate step; the
> one
> > > > > where the recommendations are accepted, or not, by the wider
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Movement Strategy: Draft recommendations are here!

[Jeff Hawke]

Andy

On Tue, Aug 20, 2019 at 7:41 PM Andy Mabbett 
wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Aug 2019 at 09:55, Jeff Hawke  wrote:
>
> > the WG then collate them and decide the final form of the
> > recommendations, to be implemented by the WMF
>
> This seems to be missing a rather crucial intermediate step; the one
> where the recommendations are accepted, or not, by the wider Wikimedia
> community.
>

 That step is not mentioned at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Frequently_asked_questions#What_steps_will_take_place_in_the_next_few_months_to_put_a_decision-making_process_in_place?

Jeff
___
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: Draft recommendations are here!

[Jeff Hawke]

Chris,

There is perhaps some confusion here.  Most Wikipedians are accustomed to a
process of *discussion*, during which a consensus emerges and is accepted
by the community at large, and implemented by community prcesses.  It has
perhaps not been made perfectly clear that this is a *feedback* process,
where the Working Groups publish their recommendations, the community pass
their comments back to the WG, and the WG then collate them and decide the
final form of the recommendations, to be implemented by the WMF.  Some of
the angst in previous comments on the list (about lack of time, and so
forth) derives from the fact that this crucial difference has clearly not
been universally understood.

Jeff

On Sun, Aug 18, 2019 at 6:01 PM Chris Keating 
wrote:

> Just to follow this up, we in the Roles and Responsibilities working group
> have now supplemented our recommendations with three potential future
> structural models for the Wikimedia movement. (These have were being worked
> on still on in the light of other feedback on Thursday, hence them not
> being published at the same time as our recommendations.)
>
> While comments and questions are welcome on Meta, we have created a survey
> for each model to help gather granular feedback on the strengths and
> weaknesses of each and that is our preferred method of getting detailed
> comments.
>
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Roles_%26_Responsibilities/Recommendations
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris Keating
> User:The Land
>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 7:37 PM Nicole Ebber 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear fellow Wikimedians,
> >
> > They’re here! [1] We are delighted to announce the first round of
> > draft recommendations for structural change within our movement have
> > been published. The recommendations have been developed by the nine
> > Wikimedia 2030 working groups and are a key tool to help us build the
> > future of our movement.
> >
> > Working group members have been working tirelessly for a year to
> > research the movement, analyze community input shared via community
> > conversations, and gain insight into external trends. A huge thank you
> > to each and every member for helping us reach this key milestone.
> >
> > The draft recommendations are a first look at ways we can adapt our
> > movement’s structures to help us advance in our strategic direction.
> > They are the starting point for conversations about what kind of
> > future we want to create together.
> >
> > The recommendations are not final. In order to get them to that stage,
> > your input is needed! We would like to hear from you all what these
> > changes would mean for you in your local or thematic context, what do
> > you like about them, and where you potentially see any red flags. And
> > of course, always critically question whether these recommendations
> > support the strategic direction.
> >
> > There are a few ways to do this:
> > * Read through the recommendations online and provide your input
> > directly on Meta. [2]
> > * If you will be at Wikimania, join us in the Wikimedia 2030 space. [3]
> > * Attend a Strategy Salon hosted by an affiliate where you live. [4]
> > * Reach out to a Strategy Liaison in your language to share feedback,
> > or lead a conversation of your own. [5]
> >
> > Over the next month, working groups will take the input they receive
> > into the recommendations, alongside external advice and research, and
> > use it to refine and finalize them. Share your views, and help shape
> > what Wikimedia will look like in 2030 and beyond.
> >
> > If you have any questions or feedback, please feel free to get in touch.
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Nicole
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> > [2]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Recommendations
> > [3] https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Wikimedia_2030
> > [4]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/2019_Community_Conversations/Strategy_Salons
> > [5]
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/People/Community_Strategy_Liaisons
> >
> > --
> > Nicole Ebber
> > Adviser International Relations
> > Program Manager Wikimedia 2030 Movement Strategy
> > Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> > https://wikimedia.de
> >
> > Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der
> > Menschheit teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns
> > dabei! https://spenden.wikimedia.de
> >
> > Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.
> > V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts
> > Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig
> > anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin,
> > Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> >
> > ___
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please reconsider!

[Jeff Hawke]

Aron

The current timeline allows for nothing like that.  According to the META
page

"Open community input will be accepted until September 15, after which
working groups will refine and finalize their work using movement input as
well as external advice and research. The final recommendations will be
shared publicly in November, and discussions around implementation will
begin in early 2020. "



Jeff


On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 8:20 PM Aron Manning  wrote:

> I appreciate that there is an attempt to start conversations. These are
> drafts of recommendations, that implies at least 1 more round of community
> feedback, and preferably 2 or 3 for the alpha drafts, such as licensing.
> Plenty of time and opportunity to come to a mutually agreeable outcome. If
> not, I expect the timelines will be adapted to the process, not the other
> way around.
>
> The mission of these recommendations is strongly relate-able, with the
> community feedback incorporated, these have a potential to benefit the
> movement. This round of conversation already provided ample feedback, with
> detailed reviews and in-depth information about local community customs,
> some of that adding important, overlooked facts, that are absolutely
> necessary to be taken into account. Good progress, I'm quite positive about
> it.
>
> Aron
> ᐧ
>
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2019 at 17:35, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>
> wrote:
>
> > Some are worse than others. I would settle for a mix of alpha and beta.
> > You don’t want to go too far before getting feedback, but when people
> don’t
> > know what you are talking about you probably have not gone far enough.
> > There seems to be a lot of variability in response to requests for
> > clarification too.  Some get a response quite quickly, others get very
> > little. I predict that the ones that do not provide clarification within
> a
> > reasonable period are likely to meet snowballing resistance. Another
> > problem is the sheer number all at the same time. This will annoy people
> wo
> > feel obliged to do a review of a large proportion of the proposal, and a
> > small sample suggests that they really do need review, to avoid some
> really
> > bad stuff getting passed.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > Behalf Of Ziko van Dijk
> > Sent: 16 August 2019 16:51
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy: please
> > reconsider!
> >
> > Let's put it this way: The "recommendations" have been presented as a
> kind
> > of "Beta". But the actual status looks more like "Alpha".
> > Kind regards
> > Ziko
> >
> > Am Do., 15. Aug. 2019 um 20:03 Uhr schrieb Peter Southwood <
> > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net>:
> >
> > > I agree that a lot of review and comment is needed before some of these
> > > items can be considered ready for further development. The amount may
> > > differ, so why not use the Wikipedian method of allowing each
> > > recommendation to remain open for discussion as long as it is being
> > > actively discussed (and relevant questions remain unanswered - if
> > questions
> > > are not answered  it may be necessary to close as no consensus, in
> which
> > > case probably best abandoned as a waste of time and effort).
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On
> > > Behalf Of Paulo Santos Perneta
> > > Sent: 15 August 2019 13:10
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] The timeline of the Wikimedia strategy:
> please
> > > reconsider!
> > >
> > > I subscribe Ziko's request to redefine the timeline of Strategy 2030,
> for
> > > the stated reasons. Not only it looks absurd, looking at the quality of
> > the
> > > published materials, which are obviously not fit for a final discussion
> > on
> > > this mater, but also because there's no rush to present results already
> > in
> > > October.
> > > Rushing to present a final set of recommendations, without proper
> > > discussion, risks producing a faulty and immature document, facing a
> > > barrage of resistence from the part of the community when trying to
> > > implement the recommendations, and basically destroy more than 1 year
> of
> > > hard work from everyone involved (core team, WGs, liasion, and the part
> > of
> > > the community who involved itself on the process).
> > >
> > > I endorse the request to the Strategy 2030 Core Team: Please review
> your
> > > schedule, and adjust your timetable, so to allow some reasonable time
> for
> > > that draft to be discussed and properly finished.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Paulo
> > >
> > > Ziko van Dijk  escreveu no dia quarta, 14/08/2019
> > à(s)
> > > 14:48:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Recently, the 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Welcoming Ryan Merkley to the Wikimedia Foundation

[Jeff Hawke]

"*support the strategy core team to move the Working Group recommendations
into implementation within the community and Foundation over the course of
the coming year."*

Does that mean that it has already been decided to implement those
rcommendations, irrespective to the views of the Community?

Jeff
___
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,