[Wikimedia-l] Re: Call for Candidates for the Charter Election Commission - EXTENSION

[Risker]

The call for candidates for the Charter Election Commission has been
extended to April 22, 2024.

Risker/Anne
For the MCDC

On Mon, 1 Apr 2024 at 01:03, Risker  wrote:

> The Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) invites qualified
> Wikimedians to apply as volunteer members of the Charter Election
> Commission (CEC).  The MCDC will select five (5) individuals for this role.
> The selected candidates will come from a variety of Wikimedia projects.
>
> The CEC is a temporary commission formed specifically to provide guidance,
> support and management of the voting process seeking ratification of the
> Movement Charter.  Its work will be complete at the time the vote result is
> published.
>
> Responsibilities of the Charter Election Commission:
>
>-
>
>Work with the selected MCDC members to finalize rules of the election
>-
>
>Formalize process for addition of voters to the SecurePoll voter list
>-
>
>Review, improve, and finalize the voting process for affiliates
>-
>
>Directly manage the affiliate voting process
>-
>
>Oversee the SecurePoll voting process
>-
>
>Resolve unplanned or unexpected issues that arise during both the
>affiliate and SecurePoll voting processes
>-
>
>Act as liaisons with WMF staff assigned to the technical aspects of
>SecurePoll
>-
>
>Act as liaisons with scrutineers
>-
>
>Announce the result of the affiliate and SecurePoll voting processes
>
>
> Successful candidates will hold the following qualifications:
>
>-
>
>Must meet at least one of the voter eligibility criteria[1] for the
>2024 Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election
>-
>
>Must be fluent in written and verbal English
>-
>
>Must be able to commit up to 5 hours a week between April 15 and July
>30, 2024 to this project, including a weekly video call with MCDC liaisons
>-
>
>Must be willing to work using Zoom, Google Meet and Google documents
>-
>
>Must be willing to sign a confidentiality agreement[2]. as CEC members
>will have access to some non-public information of persons
>-
>
>Candidates who have experience in leadership with respect to
>SecurePoll election(s) or affiliate selection processes for WMF Board of
>Trustees seats are preferred
>-
>
>Candidates who have experience as members of a Wikimedia movement
>committee, Affiliations Committee, or similar decision-making body are
>welcome to apply
>
>
> Interested Wikimedians are invited to apply for consideration to the MCDC
> at mcdc {AT} wikimedia.org by April 8, 2024, stating their Wikimedia user
> name, their relevant experience, and identifying the Wikimedia project they
> consider their main focus of contribution. Successful candidates will be
> notified by April 12, 2024.
>
> The Movement Charter Drafting Committee is responsible to develop a draft
> Movement Charter for consideration by the Wikimedia movement. A full draft
> of the proposed Charter will be published on April 2, 2024[3] for a final
> round of community consultations. The final draft of the Charter will be
> published by the MCDC in June 2024. Voting will start in mid- to late June
> and results will be announced in late July 2024.
>
> For the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,
>
>
> User:Risker/Anne Clin
>
>
> Notes:
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2024/Voter_eligibility_guidelines
>
> [2]
> https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal:Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information
>
> [3]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#The_full_draft_of_the_Wikimedia_Movement_Charter_will_soon_be_shared
>
>
>
___
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/JCYT2LLEQW3FT63ESAFWFQO35BUADIF2/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Call for Candidates for the Charter Election Commission

[Risker]

The Movement Charter Drafting Committee (MCDC) invites qualified
Wikimedians to apply as volunteer members of the Charter Election
Commission (CEC).  The MCDC will select five (5) individuals for this role.
The selected candidates will come from a variety of Wikimedia projects.

The CEC is a temporary commission formed specifically to provide guidance,
support and management of the voting process seeking ratification of the
Movement Charter.  Its work will be complete at the time the vote result is
published.

Responsibilities of the Charter Election Commission:

   -

   Work with the selected MCDC members to finalize rules of the election
   -

   Formalize process for addition of voters to the SecurePoll voter list
   -

   Review, improve, and finalize the voting process for affiliates
   -

   Directly manage the affiliate voting process
   -

   Oversee the SecurePoll voting process
   -

   Resolve unplanned or unexpected issues that arise during both the
   affiliate and SecurePoll voting processes
   -

   Act as liaisons with WMF staff assigned to the technical aspects of
   SecurePoll
   -

   Act as liaisons with scrutineers
   -

   Announce the result of the affiliate and SecurePoll voting processes


Successful candidates will hold the following qualifications:

   -

   Must meet at least one of the voter eligibility criteria[1] for the 2024
   Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election
   -

   Must be fluent in written and verbal English
   -

   Must be able to commit up to 5 hours a week between April 15 and July
   30, 2024 to this project, including a weekly video call with MCDC liaisons
   -

   Must be willing to work using Zoom, Google Meet and Google documents
   -

   Must be willing to sign a confidentiality agreement[2]. as CEC members
   will have access to some non-public information of persons
   -

   Candidates who have experience in leadership with respect to SecurePoll
   election(s) or affiliate selection processes for WMF Board of Trustees
   seats are preferred
   -

   Candidates who have experience as members of a Wikimedia movement
   committee, Affiliations Committee, or similar decision-making body are
   welcome to apply


Interested Wikimedians are invited to apply for consideration to the MCDC
at mcdc {AT} wikimedia.org by April 8, 2024, stating their Wikimedia user
name, their relevant experience, and identifying the Wikimedia project they
consider their main focus of contribution. Successful candidates will be
notified by April 12, 2024.

The Movement Charter Drafting Committee is responsible to develop a draft
Movement Charter for consideration by the Wikimedia movement. A full draft
of the proposed Charter will be published on April 2, 2024[3] for a final
round of community consultations. The final draft of the Charter will be
published by the MCDC in June 2024. Voting will start in mid- to late June
and results will be announced in late July 2024.

For the Movement Charter Drafting Committee,


User:Risker/Anne Clin


Notes:

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2024/Voter_eligibility_guidelines

[2]
https://foundation.wikimedia.org/wiki/Legal:Confidentiality_agreement_for_nonpublic_information

[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Movement_Charter#The_full_draft_of_the_Wikimedia_Movement_Charter_will_soon_be_shared
___
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/NJKGVCTQV4S5GNPV5IMTQ5SRP7JWPYP4/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Urgent attention required because Commons is blocked in Pakistan

[Risker]

Could someone please explicitly state which Wikimedia projects are blocked
in Pakistan?  This thread starts around the blocking of Commons, but
information provided by James Heilman implies that (at least one point) ALL
Wikimedia projects are blocked.  So, to be clear, are Wikipedias also
blocked?  Other projects?  Understanding the extent of the block will help
the broader community to best assist our Pakistani colleagues in continuing
to contribute, and for helping the broad Pakistani citizenship to access
our work.

It may be helpful for someone from the WMF who is in a position to report
to tell us exactly which projects are currently blocked, and whether or not
any of the originally blocked projects have now had blocks lifted.

Risker/Anne

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 11:21, Saqib Qayyum  wrote:

> I remember this statement was issued when Wikipedia was briefly blocked
> last year.
> --
> Saqib Qayyum
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 7:54 AM James Heilman  wrote:
>
>> Here is the press release from Feb 3, 2023 from the WMF urging Pakistan
>> to unblock Wikimedia Projects.
>>
>>
>> https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2023/02/03/wikimedia-foundation-urges-pakistan-telecommunications-authority-to-restore-access-to-wikipedia-in-pakistan/
>>
>> Appears the reason has to do with religious content
>>
>>
>> https://netblocks.org/reports/wikipedia-restricted-in-pakistan-over-alleged-sacrilegious-content-nAg35pAp
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 6:40 PM Neurodivergent Netizen <
>> idoh.idreamofhor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> IP block exemption is already automatically granted to admins, at least
>>> on the English Wikipedia; it’s rarely needed enough that further automatic
>>> exemption doesn’t really make sense. VPNs, typically costing money, aren’t
>>> an accessible workaround, anyways. Let’s redirect attention back to getting
>>> Commons unblocked.
>>>
>>> From,
>>> I dream of horses
>>> She/her
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mar 19, 2024, at 2:40 PM, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
>>> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> It's intriguing (to me) to contemplate how the notion of restricting IP
>>> editing in specific circumstances is often viewed as a violation of
>>> principle, even when supported by examples or data, yet a restriction like
>>> requiring long-standing users to jump through hoops just to use a VPN for
>>> privacy—something standard nowadays—is considered necessary and acceptable.
>>> Both policies aim to address issues while weighing the pros and cons and
>>> inevitably curbing some degree of freedom.
>>>
>>> Personally, I question the efficiency of the VPN restriction. I hold a
>>> different perspective: implementing a one or two-year, 100-500-edit
>>> registration threshold for automatic exemption of registered users seems
>>> reasonable.
>>>
>>> Nevertheless, it's important to recognize that nothing is inherently
>>> necessary; these are always political and not technical choices.
>>>
>>> It's not just vandals ruining it; it's also the approach taken. By
>>> granting trolls immense power to disrupt everyone's activities, you fuel
>>> their mischief. Thus, every time these extreme measures are enforced and
>>> standardized, they inevitably lead to wasted time and endless debates about
>>> the status quo, and regular users pay a price. Not hypothetically, for
>>> real we know. Whoever prioritizes the pursuit of trolls and vandals
>>> over the work of regular users, de facto feeds the troll.
>>>
>>> It's important to clarify: as seasoned users, many of us have kinda
>>> learned to navigate this "mess" and endure it... similar issues have
>>> been grappled with for years, Commons management shows little sign of
>>> improvement and we just don't care anymore.
>>>
>>> However, for those who haven't mastered it or are stuck in some
>>> nationwide quagmire as this one, suggesting VPNs as a solution is
>>> impractical—unless you anticipate tens of thousands of users from a country
>>> with millions of inhabitants to individually request IP exemptions. It's
>>> evident that the log of such a system would not be sustainable.
>>>
>>> I remain skeptical that an alternative solution will be implemented,
>>> given the likelihood that the approach will mirror that of the VPN case or
>>> other instances—utilizing massive and

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Urgent attention required because Commons is blocked in Pakistan

[Risker]

VPNs and IP block exemption may or may not be useful for contributing to
Commons, but contribution is not the only thing at issue here.

The purpose of Commons is to act as a media repository for (a) all
Wikimedia projects and (b) the world as a whole, without cost or licensing
issues.  Every day, hundreds if not thousands of Commons files are used in
news media, academia, and other places outside of Wikimedia projects.
Commons files appear in the majority of Wikimedia articles.   Therefore,
free and open access to Wikimedia Commons as part of the knowledge
available to all of humanity is a major objective.  It's also where we, as
a community, store useful documents and files associated with significant
information about our movement, our projects, and many other things that
may affect all projects, so access to them is important, too.

I have no doubt that the Pakistani block is motivated by matters that have
nothing to do with free knowledge or the Wikimedia mission. If I was a
betting woman, I'd say that this may be an attempt to avoid a public uproar
about blocking Wikipedia itself, but with Commons being so much less
visible, it's easier to block that project and wind up with essentially the
same effect.

I am aware that there are multiple language Wikipedias edited by our
Pakistani editors. One possible interim solution might be ensuring that
images can be uploaded directly to those Wikipedia projects, and copies of
Commons images be hosted on those projects. Some Wikipedias retained their
own project-specific media storage, and many of their policies, procedures
and guidelines could be used as a framework for the Pakistani-languages
wikis to develop their own processes. As English is one of Pakistan's
official languages, it would be worthwhile to have a discussion on English
Wikipedia to work on this, too. Bots located outside of Pakistan could be
used to both bring images to those Wikipedias and to copy their images over
to Commons for global use.

Of course, the longer-term goal is to have the block lifted entirely. What
I  am suggesting is a mitigation strategy only.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 19 Mar 2024 at 13:17, Saqib Qayyum  wrote:

> Hello Mr James
>
> Certainly, using a VPN is a workaround, but it's worth noting that
> obtaining an IP block exemption is still necessary to edit Commons, and
> this is not always feasible for all users. Many may not even be aware of
> its existence. For instance, I couldn't edit Commons since October 2020
> until I discovered the option for IP ban exemption. .
>
> And because of this, contributions to Commons from Pakistan have
> significantly dwindled. For instance, I recall organizing Wiki Loves
> Monuments Pakistan from 2014, where we used to receive thousands of images
> annually. However, in recent years, the number of uploads has drastically
> declined, with only a maximum of 100 photos being uploaded each year. This
> trend underscores the challenges Pakistani users face in accessing and
> contributing to the site.
> --
> Saqib Qayyum
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:55 PM James Heilman  wrote:
>
>> Can you not just use a VPN?
>>
>> James
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 9:29 PM Saqib Qayyum 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
>>>
>>> I am writing to you as a concerned volunteer from Pakistan regarding a
>>> critical issue that has been persisting for several years now. Despite
>>> multiple attempts to communicate this matter to members of the WMF's
>>> communication team, there has been a disappointing lack of response or
>>> acknowledgment.
>>>
>>> For the past several years, Commons has been blocked in Pakistan. While
>>> Wikipedia was briefly blocked last year, the swift response from both
>>> Pakistani and international news media led to its unblocking. However, the
>>> blockade of Commons, being a less prominent site in comparison, has gone
>>> largely unnoticed.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, several journalists I have spoken to have also expressed
>>> frustration over their attempts to reach out to WMF staff regarding this
>>> issue, only to receive no response.
>>>
>>> I urge the WMF to prioritize this matter and take immediate action to
>>> address the ongoing blockage of Commons in Pakistan.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.
>>> --
>>> Saqib Qayyum
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Saqib
>>> ___
>>> 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
>&

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Africa Wiki Challenge 2024 Organizers Virtual Office Hours

[Risker]

Apologies for letting through that obvious advertisement. The account has
now been blocked.

Risker/Anne (List admin)






On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 at 08:56,  wrote:

> Attention to all the https://elitewikiwriters.com;>best
> Wikipedia experts out there! If you're looking to dive into the Africa
> Wiki Challenge 2024, mark your calendars for the Organizers' Virtual Office
> Hour series. It's your chance to learn about participating in or organizing
> local events, navigating rapid grant applications, and gaining insights
> into the Africa Wiki Challenge. Don't miss out on this invaluable
> opportunity to contribute to the vibrant world of Wikipedia!
> ___
> 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/PGBNZFNMR2FFSQNYBHAWJRDX7DB6JKBY/
> 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/2WVMPS6I56YI6BNVJ3SPAUP6RQ4DQUPC/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Arabic Wikipedia day of action

[Risker]

List administrator writing here.

This thread is getting very heated.  From this point forward, all messages
to this mailing list are being moderated to address the increasingly strong
statements being made here.

This list is about the Wikimedia movement.  It is not about the political
situation in the Middle East.  Messages that are not constructive will be
rejected and/or discarded.

Risker/Anne (One of the list administrators)


On Sat, 23 Dec 2023 at 14:02, Dan Rosenthal  wrote:

> An utterly shameful decision. I guess Israeli and Jewish lives aren't
> worth standing up for, according to Arabic Wikipedia.
>
> Dan Rosenthal
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 8:18 PM Farah Jack Mustaklem 
> wrote:
>
>> Greetings to all,
>>
>> Arabic Wikipedia editors have agreed to hold a day of action to highlight
>> the plight of the Palestinian people and to call for peace. At 00:00 UTC on
>> the 23rd of December, the Arabic Wikipedia "went dark", meaning that
>> Wikipedia will not be editable for 24 hours. Wikipedia remains accessible
>> for reading, though.
>>
>> This action stems from the community's sense of moral duty to combat
>> injustice. Wikipedia communities have previously stood up for human rights
>> such as by protesting legal travesties like SOPA and PIPA or by showing
>> solidarity with Ukrainians following Russia's invasion of their country.
>>
>> May everyone celebrating the holidays - and those who aren't - stay safe,
>> and may peace and justice prevail throughout the World.
>>
>> All the best
>>
>> Farah
>>
>> ___
>> 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/OCPVKAGK3TAXJLLZPVFZVJKB3FVDZEUY/
>> 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/4UNDOGTI6DSTDRF6BPEHFPOSO6AZLJVX/
> 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/D5RRCCBDO7NE7573O44OYLLZZGHQFRLJ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Post-Wikimania Covid cases

[Risker]

I suspect if you took any group of 800 people who almost all traveled by
air for between 8 and 25 hours from all over the world, and probably all
spent what felt like way too much time in airports in each direction, and
also made the conscious choice not to mask up while in close proximity with
800 other people from all over the world, we'd find a pretty similar
pattern of illness.  Almost everyone had close enough contact with at least
3000 people in the week surrounding Wikimania to potentially pick up COVID
or any other bugs; most people would normally have contact with fewer than
100 and those potential contacts would likely be from the same geographic
region. I've heard of several cases, but none amongst those who chose to
wear masks at the conference, and there were quite a few mask wearers.

Speaking personally, I tested before I left, when I returned, and then 5
days after return and all were negative. I know I had multiple extended
close contacts with people (including a couple in this thread! Hope you're
feeling better!) while there. I'm really sorry that some folks caught COVID
during their travels, but I don't think there's any reasonable chance to
identify an "index patient" at Wikimania.  As others have pointed out, it
is increasingly difficult to obtain at-home and PCR testing - I only had
home testing kits because I stocked up just before they became unavailable
here, and PCR testing is usually only done if someone is sick enough for
hospital admission in most countries now, even if they have a known contact.

It is always, always a risk to participate in international travel and
extensive contact with hundreds and thousands of people. It was a risk
before COVID, and it will remain a risk long after COVID is considered an
endemic illness similar to influenza.

And this is a good reminder for all of us to go wash our hands. Again.

Risker/Anne

On Fri, 8 Sept 2023 at 20:28, Neurodivergent Netizen <
idoh.idreamofhor...@gmail.com> wrote:

> It would be hard to know where you picked it up from. Certainly the longer
> you?re in a venue, the chances increase but you can still pick it up in
> locations you may have only spent a few minutes in.
>
>
> It’s difficult, but not impossible; contact tracing is A Thing, and can be
> traced back to John Snow tracing back a cholera outbreak to a water
> fountain pre-germ theory.
>
> I do not agree with enforcing testing, face masks and COVID vaccinations,
> when countries have moved away from such restrictions.
>
>
> A private organization, non-profit or otherwise, shouldn’t have to have
> permission from the government to enforce face masks. If an organization
> wants to enforce COVID precautions for their event, they should do so
> without conseqeunce. This may not be what you mean, the above statement
> might be more of a shrug, but such restrictions on enforcing COVID
> precautions isn’t without precedent; according to AARP.org, in Florida:
>
> A law passed by the state legislature May 3 and signed by Gov. Ron
> DeSantis May 11 permanently prohibits private businesses and government
> entities from imposing mask mandates. Local governments and school systems
> were already barred from establishing mask rules and other COVID-19
> restrictions under a May 2021 gubernatorial order.
>
> From,
>
> I dream of horses
>
> She/her
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2023, at 4:55 PM, Robert Myers 
> wrote:
>
> It would be hard to know where you picked it up from. Certainly the longer
> you?re in a venue, the chances increase but you can still pick it up in
> locations you may have only spent a few minutes in.
>
> There was an uptick in cases world wide around the time of Wikimania. I
> was unable to attend due to work commitments, since my place of employment
> had people off due to COVID.
>
> Wikimania didn?t have any requirements, it recommend ART/RAT, face masks
> and to stay away from the conference if unwell
> https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2023:Health. PCR tests are now
> impossible to get, even if you can, they are now expensive. Though I found
> ART/RAT to be relatively reliable but just not as sensitive (T line would
> be faint for the first two days of symptoms), when I got COVID for the
> first time in March/April this year.
>
> I do not agree with enforcing testing, face masks and COVID vaccinations,
> when countries have moved away from such restrictions.
>
> --
> Robert Myers
> robert.my...@wikimedia.org.au
>
> On 9 Sep 2023, at 2:01 am, Lane Rasberry  wrote:
>
> ?
> I got COVID at Wikimania as did my boyfriend Fabian. Our symptoms both
> began two days after the conference. I was sick in bed, hardly moving for 3
> days. Both of us have been vaccinated five times in the United States and
> caught COVID one time before.
>
> Completely unrelated

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Africa Day Campaign 2023 Winners

[Risker]

Wow, this is a really impressive result.  Congratulations to the winners
and thanks to all of the participants.

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 at 11:56, Eugene Masiku  wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> The African Knowledge Initiative
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Africa_Knowledge_Initiative>
>  (AKI),
> seeks to leverage the Wikimedia tools and platforms to breed innovative
> solutions to bridging the content gap on global digital knowledge networks.
>
> This year Open Foundation West Africa’s <http://ofwafrica.org/> annual
> writing contest the Africa Wiki Challenge was used as an avenue to help
> achieve AKI’s goal.
>
> The campaign was named the Africa Day Campaign
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Africa_Day_Campaign_2023> and themed  "Africa
> Free Continent Trade" to align with the Africa Union Day 2023 theme.
>
> From the Campaign's Program Dashboard
> <https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/campaigns/africa_day_campaign_2023/overview>,
> we tracked a total of 20 Programs, with 473 editors, from 13 countries
> contributing to 4000 articles
>
> After months of intense and rigorous reviews by the Africa Day Contest
> Jury, we are elated to announce the winners of the Africa Day Campaign 2023.
>
> Congratulations to the winners of the campaign.
>
> Winners
>
> Winner- User:Muhammed Idriss Criteria from Nigeria-  502 new articles in
> Hausa Wikipedia
>
> 2nd Winner - User:Gwanki from Nigeria- 183 new articles in Hausa
> Wikipedia
>
> 3rd Winner- User:Charbel1719 Benin - 75 new articles in French Wikipedia
>
> Top Female Contributor- User:Mercyjamb123 -  66 new articles in Igbo
> Wikipedia
>
>
> We are super grateful to our international jury team who worked
> effortlessly to ensure that the winners were identified.
>
> International Jury
>
> User: Azogbonon - Benin
>
> User: Yaw Tuba  - Ghana
>
> User: Anani A. George- Ghana
>
> User: Bile_rene - Cameroon
>
> User:  Justine Msechu -Tanzania
>
> User: Memoriesghana -Ghana
>
> User: Kwaku Berko- Ghana
>
> To all our partners, local organizers, and editors, we appreciate your
> efforts in making this campaign a success.
>
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Eugene Masiku
>
> --
> Eugene Makafui Masiku,
> Communications Officer
> Open Foundation West Africa
> ___
> 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/J2TA3Y6XZXCQMCG6TS3GFQL7XGJSQNW3/
> 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/F3IQXWU33CDBIFQTFKVRJNNEJ6YOFLQZ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Tribute to Ingo Koll (User:Kipala)

[Risker]

Kipala was a great example as a Wikimedian, and his absence will be felt in
many corners of the movement.  My sympathies to his family and his
colleagues.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 at 17:57, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Oh, I will miss him!!  I've had many conversations with Kipala over the
> years. He was a bridge for people and ideas, making the possible real.
> Always uplifting, and patient with me in the early days of sw:wp.  An
> excellent thought Asaf, to honor his memory.  ❤️‍, SJ
>
> On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 5:51 PM Asaf Bartov  wrote:
>
>> What a tremendous loss.  Ingo was a great Wikipedian, a great human
>> being, and a friend.
>>
>> It is comforting to know that his great work in Swahili Wikipedia will
>> remain, providing free knowledge to millions of people, forever. His
>> personal example, too, will resonate forever with all who knew him: Ingo's
>> dedication and patient perseverance in the face of frustrations and
>> setbacks was a personal inspiration to me, and I am grateful to have had
>> his example, and for the small part I had been able to play in helping some
>> of his efforts in Africa.
>>
>> I encourage everyone to consider contributing something on Wikipedia, in
>> whatever language you're comfortable in, perhaps about an east African
>> topic. Ingo would have liked that.
>>
>>Asaf
>>
>> Asaf Bartov (he/him/his)
>>
>> Lead Program Officer, Community Development Communities
>>
>> Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
>>
>> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
>> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
>> https://donate.wikimedia.org
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 12:42 AM Antoni Mtavangu <
>> antonicmtava...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> “Your dedication, leadership, and commitment to helping our Wikimedia
>>> communities within the Movement will always be remembered.”
>>>
>>> Hello dear Wikimedians,
>>>
>>> Wikimedia Tanzania
>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Tanzania>
>>> and Jenga Wikipedia ya Kiswahili
>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Jenga_Wikipedia_ya_Kiswahili> User
>>> groups are in particular, deeply saddened following the passing of our
>>> beloved fellow Wikimedian *Ingo Koll (user: Kipala)*, who according to
>>> the information shared by his wife with us, he has passed away on the 10th
>>> July 2023 at his house in his home country, Germany.
>>>
>>> Ingo Koll was a German who happened to live in Tanzania and Kenya for
>>> many years. Being a pastor and a lecturer, he learned Swahili and became
>>> one of the super-active Swahili Wikipedia contributors and administrators.
>>> He was a reliable cornerstone in the development of Swahili Wikipedia. He
>>> was a knowledgeable person who collaborated closely with the Astronomy and
>>> Space Science Association of Tanzania (ASSAT) to contribute much on
>>> Astronomy topics in Swahili language on Swahili Wikipedia, was one of the
>>> great mentors who helped the formation of Wikimedia Tanzania and also was a
>>> co-founder of Jenga Wikipedia ya Kiswahili (Build Swahili Wikipedia).
>>>
>>> Tanzanian and East African Wikimedians benefited much from his
>>> unwavering support, leadership, mentorship, and coaching when it came to
>>> training them on Wikimedia projects, especially about Wikipedia.
>>>
>>> Wikimedia Tanzania, Jenga Wikipedia ya Kiswahili User Groups, and all
>>> other Wikimedians who interacted with him within the Wikimedia Movement
>>> will always remember his valuable contributions to the Movement.
>>>
>>>
>>> May his soul rest in peace. Amen!
>>>
>>> #RIP #INGOKOLL
>>>
>>>
>>> *On behalf of Wikimedia Tanzania and Jenga Wikipedia ya Kiswahili,*
>>>
>>>
>>> Antoni Mtavangu (He/Him)
>>>
>>> Cofounder-Wikimedia Tanzania
>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Tanzania>
>>> ___
>>> 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/C7XFYZR2UCZV7IQC2R7YKMZTBZJHIGBO/
>>> To unsubscribe send an e

[Wikimedia-l] Re: ChatGPT as a reliable source

[Risker]

(Apologies, accidentally deleted, content recovered)


From: Jimmy Wales 
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Thu, 18 May 2023 14:48:06 +0100
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Re: ChatGPT as a reliable source

On 2023-05-17 19:05, Samuel Klein wrote:
>
> I think any generative tools used to rewrite a section or article, or
> to produce a sibling version for a different reading-level, or to
> generate a timeline or other visualization that is then embedded in
> the article, should all be cited somehow.

While I don't have anything against that, obviously, I'm not really
convinced that we need to do this.  I suppose it depends on the context.

If a non-native speaker of a language uses a spell checker, we don't ask
them to even mention it.  If they use a more sophisticated grammar tool
to help them
with some nuance of that language, we don't ask them to even mention
it.  If they use an AI tool to evaluate and edit their paragraph for
tone?  What if they
use an AI tool to compare the text they are writing with the source
being cited, to see if the AI notices any discrepancies?

I feel that those last two use cases are going to be ubiquitous within a
couple of years, possibly even embedded in browsers or browser extensions.

> People using generative tools to draft new material should find
> reliable sources for every claim in that material, much more densely
> than you would when summarizing a series of sources yourself.

This is definitely true.
___
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/YZI7OA322C5PBICZ373NXCET6HUS33XW/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] ChatGPT as a reliable source

[Risker]

( Apologies, accidentally deleted, content recovered)

From: danboy12342 Mui 
To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 22:37:01 +0100
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] ChatGPT as a reliable source
I think that there is a difference between "ChatGPT told me the sky is red
and that is my source" and "a reliable source told me the sky was blue and
ChatGPT helped me write about that"

At it's core The GPT models are text generators, trained specifically to
sound as human and reliable as possible in the generated text. Nothing
else. The factual or not factual part is built on top, in ChatGPT's case
the "facts" are put together from whatever it read on the internet.
Something like Palm, Bard or BingGPT have a layer of "facts" built on top
with search functions like looking up your query for you and then
paraphrasing an article it found.

In short; ChatGPT isn't a source,
 but you can give it information and ask for a well written article and use
that (although at this point in time reread to make sure it don't throw
anything else in there). So a secondary question is how do we, or de we at
all mention that chatGPT was used to generate the text, assuming the AI
gives you something useable do we cite just the source we gave to the bot
or do we cite the fact the bot read it and then produced a summary or
extracted facts from it. (That of course a human needs to check)

I think notes like "information from source X, ai edited" or "ai
summarized" should be something seriously considered for Wikipedia and
implemented at lot sooner than you think.

-
-- Daniel Mui, (Daniel 生意 梅) (ダニエル・ムイ)

Caution of biases: i have been a part of openAI's beta programs for many
years and have a strong positive bias towards them and the work they do.

I'm a firm believer in AI supplementing every part of human life in the
near future.

As a developer I've become used to assuming everyone as heard of everything
and may come off as ignorant or expect you to know or be familiar with
something you really shouldn't be, i apologize for that.

On Wed, May 17, 2023, 08:08 Kiril Simeonovski 
wrote:

> Dear Wikimedians,
>
> Two days ago, a participant in one of our edit-a-thons consulted ChatGPT
> when writing an article on the Macedonian Wikipedia that did not exist on
> any other language edition. ChatGPT provided some output, but the problem
> was how to cite it.
>
> The community on the Macedonian Wikipedia has not yet had a discussion on
> this matter and we do not have any guidelines. So, my main questions are
> the following:
>
> * Can ChatGPT be used as a reliable source and, if yes, how would the
> citation look like?
>
> * Are there any ongoing community discussions on introducing guidelines?
>
> My personal opinion is that ChatGPT should be avoided as a reliable
> source, and only the original source where the algorithm gets the
> information from should be used.
>
> Best regards,
> Kiril
> ___
> 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/WMGIBNPN5JNJGUOCLWFCCPD7EL5YN6KU/
> 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/XNCEWQXVL6NWX5FWFPVOTNRLWQC76F6P/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Could the broad use of ChatGPT mean more accesses to Wikipedia?

[Risker]

(Apologies - accidentally deleted, content recovered)

From: Maryana Pinchuk 
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 23:59:20 -
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Could the broad use of ChatGPT mean more
accesses to Wikipedia?
Hi Anders & Ziko,

I do think you're right that people may increasingly turn to AI assistants
to get the kind of knowledge they formerly found on Wikipedia – and because
ChatGPT doesn't currently link to Wikipedia by default when answering a
query using our content, this poses a risk to the visibility and relevance
of our movement.

The "Future Audiences" team at Wikimedia is currently focused on better
understanding how people might interact with our content on an AI assistant
if it were more explicitly attributed, by building a Wikipedia plugin for
ChatGPT that does just that. You can find more details on this project
here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2023-2024/Draft/Future_Audiences#FA2.2_Conversational_AI

The technical work is still in its early stages work, but if you'd like to
get updates on progress and provide input on future releases, please sign
up on the Meta page!

- Maryana (Pinchuk, not Iskander) on behalf of Future Audiences
___
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/3CPOJTJ2RLUY2ZT3RDHZVSVT7B22WIBF/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Could the broad use of ChatGPT mean more accesses to Wikipedia?

[Risker]

(Apologies, this was accidentally deleted but we have recovered the content)

-- Forwarded message --
From: Maryana Pinchuk 
To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Wed, 17 May 2023 23:39:43 -
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikianswers Proposal
Hi all,

Just a quick +1 to Risker's comment that the WMF Product & Tech team has
set aside some resources in this fiscal year to exploring/testing
hypotheses around engaging "Future Audiences." You can read more about this
work here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2023-2024/Draft/Future_Audiences.
The remit of this team is not to build an entirely new project from
scratch, but rather to test a variety of underlying assumptions/hypotheses
that can help inform larger strategic investment (like what kind of new
projects we may need, if any) in future annual plans.

We're still compiling our test hypotheses, but I think this proposal
touches on a few of them (e.g.: people prefer to receive information
curated/collated by other humans vs AI; there are many more people who
would be regular visitors to our projects if our content wasn't all
longform text and better fit a quick-facts-browsing format, etc.). I'd love
to hear all your thoughts on whether these are the right hypotheses to
think about testing, if there are others, and how we might begin to test
some of these this year – though I'll note that we had a great turnout for
our first community Future Audiences focus group (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2023-2024/Draft/External_Trends/Future_Audiences_conversation)
and I'm not sure all the attendees are on this mailing list, so would
personally love to see this discussion move to the talk page on Meta :)

-Maryana (Pinchuk, not Iskander), on behalf of Future Audiences
___
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/PNGKLZ7AFAA4S2CUZ25RWOSKENU5JYF3/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikianswers Proposal

[Risker]

I note that there are discussions going on in the Technology stream that
very definitely touch on this topic.

The first I noticed is a discussion on Wikitech-L entitled "Word embeddings
/ vector search".  The second one is a discussion point on this week's Tech
News:   There is a recently formed team at the Wikimedia Foundation which
will be focusing on experimenting with new tools. Currently they are
building a prototype ChatGPT plugin that allows information generated by
ChatGPT to be properly attributed
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan/2023-2024/Draft/Future_Audiences#FA2.2_Conversational_AI>
to the Wikimedia projects.

These may be good starting points to discover what is already happening
within the technical space, and what the thinking is on the likelihood of
it filling the need of the proposed project. Regardless, since the project
being proposed will require a lot of technical/developer/engineer work, it
would be very useful to talk to the people who already have been working
and researching in this topic area to determine if the proposed project is
viable.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 15 May 2023 at 20:41, Adam Sobieski 
wrote:

> I would share that I don't fully understand the current WMF procedure for
> project proposals. I noticed an April 14 email in this mailing list about
> forming a new taskforce on these topics (
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/thread/ZRV7MGHF4IH6LCN3DF6FF6IFMHXJTXZO/).
> So, when it comes to expectations for a project proposal, the current WMF
> process, procedure, and related definitions of success for a proposal, I
> have more questions than answers.
>
> James, thank you. I see your points and, as envisioned, teambuilding for
> the Wikianswers project would welcome participants from both within and
> outside of the WMF movement. I anticipate a considerable excitement with
> respect to combinations of AI and Wiki platforms, infrastructure, and
> search. Hopefully the Wikianswers proposal indicates some of the
> possibilities and opportunities in these regards to interested researchers
> and developers (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikianswers).
>
>
> Best regards,
> Adam
>
> P.S.: Thank you for the discussion thus far. I'm still considering the
> epistemology of which AI-generated multimodal answers would be cacheable,
> editable, and thus correctable by a community of editors.
>
> --
> *From:* James Heilman 
> *Sent:* Monday, May 15, 2023 6:28 PM
> *To:* Wikimedia Mailing List 
> *Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikianswers Proposal
>
> Setting up a project outside the WMF would be much easier to start with.
> One can then trial the idea and if successful the movement may then be
> willing to have the WMF take it on.
>
> WikiVoyage started outside the WMF by a small group in Germany (after they
> split from WikiTravel). They had an active community and simply migrated to
> WMF servers.
>
> Similarly we at Wiki Project Med have started NC Commons
> https://nccommons.org/wiki/Main_Page Will the movement be interested in
> this project at some point? I guess we will see.
>
> James
>
> On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 3:16 AM Risker  wrote:
>
> My plate is full at the moment, and project creation is not a specific
> interest of mine.  I hope that Adam does not see things as demotivating;
> creating a new project type *should* be a big challenge. I do think that
> those standards need to be significantly revised.  They were all written at
> a time when the WMF had no problems at all just raising the target for
> fundraising, and being successful with the new goal.  This year we are
> dealing with the reality that the fundraising pool is not unlimited.  We
> have been told flat out that there are significant limitations to the
> available human resources required to create a new project.  This isn't
> 2012 anymore, it's 11 years later, and the world in which the Wikimedia
> community operates has changed significantly. We can't just be doing the
> same things that we did back in the olden days.  It would be setting
> ourselves up - as a community and as a potential new project - for failure.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On Mon, 15 May 2023 at 13:53, Ilario valdelli  wrote:
>
> I think that here the proposal is to have a new sister project (
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_projects).
>
> There is a long list:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects
>
> The concept behind a new sister project is the capacity to build a
> community and an enthusastic group of people.
>
> The policy is here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/New_project_process
>
> There is nothing about capacity and risk management.
>
> I wanted to en

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikianswers Proposal

[Risker]

My plate is full at the moment, and project creation is not a specific
interest of mine.  I hope that Adam does not see things as demotivating;
creating a new project type *should* be a big challenge. I do think that
those standards need to be significantly revised.  They were all written at
a time when the WMF had no problems at all just raising the target for
fundraising, and being successful with the new goal.  This year we are
dealing with the reality that the fundraising pool is not unlimited.  We
have been told flat out that there are significant limitations to the
available human resources required to create a new project.  This isn't
2012 anymore, it's 11 years later, and the world in which the Wikimedia
community operates has changed significantly. We can't just be doing the
same things that we did back in the olden days.  It would be setting
ourselves up - as a community and as a potential new project - for failure.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 15 May 2023 at 13:53, Ilario valdelli  wrote:

> I think that here the proposal is to have a new sister project (
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_projects).
>
> There is a long list:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Proposals_for_new_projects
>
> The concept behind a new sister project is the capacity to build a
> community and an enthusastic group of people.
>
> The policy is here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/New_project_process
>
> There is nothing about capacity and risk management.
>
> I wanted to encourage Adam after some very demotivating comments and to
> look to the positive aspects that, in my opinion, are present in this idea.
>
> To start his project, he needs 10 interested participants / supporters.
> Are you interested?
>
> Kind regards
> On 15/05/2023 19:16, Risker wrote:
>
> Sohow much does it cost to develop and run an entirely new and
> different type of project?  Who develops it?  How much would the hosting
> cost on an ongoing basis?  Is this project more important and more needed
> than an existing project type?
>
> These aren't small questions; they are in fact the questions that need to
> be asked every time we come up with an idea (no matter how great the idea)
> for a new project type.  Contrary to popular belief, there isn't an
> unlimited budget, and there aren't unlimited staffing resources for these
> things.  Everything costs real money and the time of real people, and we as
> a broad community need to be far more cognizant of the limitations of these
> resources, and the likelihood that the financial situation is not going to
> change significantly in the coming five years.
>
> Personally, I think this is an idea with possibilities, but it is a very
> expensive one because it will need an entirely different way of operating.
> So...where would be cut costs to make this possible?  Should we close some
> little-used projects so they no longer draw on our limited pool of
> resources?  Should we cut back on volunteer/community safety and resources?
>
> There are always trade-offs.  In the WMF annual plan, they talk about some
> of those trade-offs.  This is another one.  New, different projects need to
> be able to justify their cost and existence. In fact, in the
> not-too-distant future, I can foresee that some minimal-use projects may
> also have to justify their existence.  I am all in favour of being
> visionary - but I'm also in favour of planting these visions in solid
> ground.
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On Mon, 15 May 2023 at 12:19, Ilario Valdelli  wrote:
>
>> I like the idea.
>>
>> Sometimes people need a simple answer.
>>
>> At the moment to receive an answer from Wikipedia for some articles
>> people need a Phd.
>>
>> A solution like that can give a smart and quick and understable answer.
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> On Mon, 15 May 2023, 11:48 Adam Sobieski, 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Wikimedia,
>>>
>>> Per the recent interest in and discussions about artificial intelligence
>>> in this mailing list, I am pleased to indicate the *Wikianswers*
>>> project proposal. The proposal describes some approaches for
>>> integrating these technologies (e.g., multimodal dialogue systems,
>>> chatbots, and question-answering systems) with existing Wiki platforms.
>>>
>>> "Wikianswers would be a large-scale, user-editable cache of multimodal
>>> answers from artificial intelligence systems, e.g., one or more large
>>> language models, which tightly integrates with Wikipedia, Wikidata, and
>>> Commons."
>>>
>>> This project proposal is described in more detail here:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikianswers .
>>>
>>> Than

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikianswers Proposal

[Risker]

Sohow much does it cost to develop and run an entirely new and
different type of project?  Who develops it?  How much would the hosting
cost on an ongoing basis?  Is this project more important and more needed
than an existing project type?

These aren't small questions; they are in fact the questions that need to
be asked every time we come up with an idea (no matter how great the idea)
for a new project type.  Contrary to popular belief, there isn't an
unlimited budget, and there aren't unlimited staffing resources for these
things.  Everything costs real money and the time of real people, and we as
a broad community need to be far more cognizant of the limitations of these
resources, and the likelihood that the financial situation is not going to
change significantly in the coming five years.

Personally, I think this is an idea with possibilities, but it is a very
expensive one because it will need an entirely different way of operating.
So...where would be cut costs to make this possible?  Should we close some
little-used projects so they no longer draw on our limited pool of
resources?  Should we cut back on volunteer/community safety and resources?

There are always trade-offs.  In the WMF annual plan, they talk about some
of those trade-offs.  This is another one.  New, different projects need to
be able to justify their cost and existence. In fact, in the
not-too-distant future, I can foresee that some minimal-use projects may
also have to justify their existence.  I am all in favour of being
visionary - but I'm also in favour of planting these visions in solid
ground.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 15 May 2023 at 12:19, Ilario Valdelli  wrote:

> I like the idea.
>
> Sometimes people need a simple answer.
>
> At the moment to receive an answer from Wikipedia for some articles people
> need a Phd.
>
> A solution like that can give a smart and quick and understable answer.
>
> Kind regards
>
> On Mon, 15 May 2023, 11:48 Adam Sobieski, 
> wrote:
>
>> Wikimedia,
>>
>> Per the recent interest in and discussions about artificial intelligence
>> in this mailing list, I am pleased to indicate the *Wikianswers* project
>> proposal. The proposal describes some approaches for integrating these
>> technologies (e.g., multimodal dialogue systems, chatbots, and
>> question-answering systems) with existing Wiki platforms.
>>
>> "Wikianswers would be a large-scale, user-editable cache of multimodal
>> answers from artificial intelligence systems, e.g., one or more large
>> language models, which tightly integrates with Wikipedia, Wikidata, and
>> Commons."
>>
>> This project proposal is described in more detail here:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikianswers .
>>
>> Thank you. Please feel free to review the project proposal and to comment
>> either here or there with any opinions, questions, feedback, or suggestions.
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Adam Sobieski
>>
>> ___
>> 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/JXYO3QW6QYCBHLS4JOHKPPAIJRPMYO4C/
>> 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/5BFKXPFA6NWGBEY26YSBRP3PUNFWW73Y/
> 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/35ALTTWNCCV56EMW7KYCP7NRKVDXBRIY/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Deror Lin passed away

[Risker]

It was always a pleasure to work with Deror, to hear him speak with such
passion for the Wikimedia community and its work, to just be in his
company.  He will be missed by so many.  May his memory be a blessing.

Risker/Anne

On Sat, 6 May 2023 at 06:59, itzik Edri  wrote:

> Dear friends,
>
> I'm sorry to update that our friend and colleague Deror Lin
> (user:Deror_Avi) passed away this morning.
>
> Deror was a truly Wikimedian in blood who poured his heart and soul into
> the movement in many ways, even in his final days. He joined Wikipedia in
> 2004 and was one of the founders of Wikimedia Israel. For over 16 years, he
> served as an active board member.
>
> He was the driving force behind Wikimania 2011 in Haifa and a key member
> of the Wikimania committee ever since. He led countless programs and
> projects, both locally and internationally, including conferences, WLM
> competitions, educational programs, photo and editing contests, and many
> others.
>
> More than that, he wrote over 8,600 articles on HEWP (comprising more than
> 2% of it!), making him the number one article writer in HEWP, alongside
> more than 37,000 contributions to Commons.
>
> For his huge contribution and love for the movement, he was honored last
> year as the Wikipedia Laureate of 2022.
>
> Deror, you were not just a colleague but a true friend. We worked together
> on many projects, events, and initiatives over the years. No matter the
> situation, you always had a smile and shining eyes with your love for
> Wikipedia.
>
> *On behalf of Wikimedia Israel, I extend our deepest condolences to
> Deror's family and friends. You will always be remembered, Deror.*
> *ברוך דיין האמת. Baruch dayan ha-emet*
>
>
> Itzik.
> ___
> 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/WUMCWUVMGMHWYPA7KZQEG6F7QBBWIMNH/
> 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/EFMWCMPCSPYR3GVMCLHJH6WSDWS4TL35/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Foundation Elections Committee: Call for New Members

[Risker]

(Forwarding on behalf of Zita)


Hello everyone,


Thank you to everyone who expressed interest in joining the Elections
Committee. If you would like to volunteer for this role, please submit your
candidacy on Meta at
Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_committee/Nominations/2023

by April 24, 2023, at 23:59 AoE (anywhere on Earth). You can find more
information in the original message here

.


Once again, thank you for your support and interest in this role.


Best regards,


Zita Zage 
___
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/MUGOI25ADLSTY3TF44VHQGY5KNNSLSN5/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The Endowment, again

[Risker]

On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 09:26,  wrote:

>
> Why didn't WMF do the groundwork for transferring the endowment funds from
> Tides to a WMF 501(c)3 given that there were over SIX long years to make
> such plans?
>
> Why does WMF STILL not know how to effect this transfer or when it will be
> completed, despite the passage of six months?
>

The timeline of when the IRS would grant 501(c)3 status was completely out
of the control of the WMF; they could make the application in a timely way,
but they could not be certain at what point this status would be granted.
I think we all recognize this; the IRS is a governmental organization whose
decision-making process and timeline are completely outside of the control
of the WMF, Wikipedia, or any other third party.  While the WMF could
reasonably expect a positive decision, it had no way of being certain when
that decision would come.

I have little doubt that many of the same people complaining of how long it
is taking to move things around *now* would also complain if staff had been
hired for an entity that didn't yet exist, based on the prospect that it
would eventually exist. Since the 501(c)3 didn't yet exist, all of its
staffing costs would have come out of the WMF budget at the same time that
other areas were being cut back in relation to lower-than-expected
fundraising.  I've got a lot more liberal a view of WMF spending than many
others in this thread, and even I think that would have been a really poor
use of limited resources.

It's not causing any form of disruption to make these changes in a
deliberate and thoughtful manner.  Everyone can take a deep breath.

Risker/Anne
___
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/ZB3WIMPAN7UFNHJU5ZBQOVYHAEE6GKTG/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Results of the Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines Vote

[Risker]

Just noting in passing that the SecurePoll default for "home wiki" is the
project on which an account made its first edit.  A large number of editors
who would consider their "home wiki" a different project (or even a
different language entirely) made their first edit on English Wikipedia;
the same is true of several of the other "large" Wikipedias.  The extended
statistical information tells us that more than half of all voters met
voting requirements on two or more projects.

It's also noteworthy that the majority of Wikimedia projects have a very
small group of contributors who would meet the voting requirements.Most
editors who work on our smaller projects made their earliest contributions
on a larger project, and that larger project is going to be considered
their "home" wiki.  SecurePoll treats an account's edits wholistically,
rather than project-by-project, and it does not record the location
(wiki/project) from which an account has voted.  It should be noted that
there isn't a lot of data provided with relation to our smaller projects in
the statistical analysis.  This is appropriate as it could impact user
privacy.

As an aside, I am part of the Movement Charter Drafting Committee team
looking at using SecurePoll for some aspects of ratification of the
Charter.  We are already discussing with the team that is responsible for
SecurePoll about some of these issues, such as users being able to select
their "home wiki", results per project, expanding the available
translations, and ways to maintain privacy for contributors to smaller
projects.  We're also watching closely for relevant comments specific to
the use of SecurePoll in this and other elections, and what improvements
Wikimedians (especially those from smaller projects) suggest for
SecurePoll.  Thanks, Xavier, for raising the issue.

Risker/Anne



On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 15:49, Stella Ng  wrote:

> Hello Xavier,
>
> Thank you for your email, and sharing your observations and concerns. Many
> other movement initiatives face similar challenges. Equitable participation
> and engagement are something we are working to improve with each and every
> interaction. The UCoC project team has poured a sizable amount of
> discussion, planning and energy into outreach to the movement throughout
> the process. The goal was to encourage participation from as many
> communities as possible.
>
>
> The ways the UCoC team encouraged participation can be seen through the
> results of this work. The Revised Enforcement Guidelines are currently
> translated into over 40 languages; voter information, banners, and emails
> were also heavily translated. The project team hosted outreach and
> conversation hours throughout the drafting process. We have made it a point
> to invite and engage with many communities, particularly small and
> medium-sized, and it is our goal to continue to ensure that the growing
> communities and small language wikis are invited to engage with us. It is
> our hope that as we progress, the UCoC and the Enforcement Guidelines will
> create a better environment that will see more interaction from all
> communities.
>
> As we embark on the next steps and stages of this ongoing project, we will
> increase engagement, conversations, and interaction with the growing
> communities and small language wikis in as many languages, places, and
> contexts as possible. The UCoC is an iterative process, and we will be
> inviting opinions of how to make it more inclusive as we continue onwards.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Stella Ng
>
> On Behalf of the UCoC Project Team
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 13, 2023 at 11:39 AM F. Xavier Dengra i Grau via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi/Bona vesprada,
>>
>> Without meaning at all that I do not respect the results of this voting,
>> I would like to call the attention to the fact that out of 3097 votes,
>> practically 2000 are circumscribed to only 4 big home wikis: en.wiki
>> (1000), de.wiki (500), fr.wiki (200) and es.wiki (150).
>>
>> Imho it is somehow concerning that 2/3 of the votes of such a key policy
>> are heavily relying on the weight of those major projects. I understand the
>> constraints in participation, but it isn't either a trivial value
>> -considering how much do we read about the WMF efforts to promote the
>> so-called “Global South” communities and the minority language wikis.
>>
>> There is a great essay on English Wikipedia, "Wikipedia:Silence does not
>> imply consent when drafting new policies
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Silence_does_not_imply_consent_when_drafting_new_policies>",
>> that has a very thoughtful background and that I like very much to remind: 
>> *&qu

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Chat GPT

[Risker]

Given what we already know about AI-like projects (think Siri, Alexis,
etc), they're the result of work done by organizations utilizing resources
hundreds of times greater than the resources within the entire Wikimedia
movement, and they'renot all that good if we're being honest.  They're
entirely dependent on existing resources.  We have seen time and again how
easily they can be led astray; ChatGPT is just the most recent example.  It
is full of misinformation.  Other efforts have resulted in the AI becoming
radicalized.  Again, it's all about what sources the AI project uses in
developing its responses, and those underlying sources are generally
completely unknown to the person asking for the information.

Ironically, our volunteers have created software that learns pretty
effectively (ORES, several anti-vandalism "bots").  The tough part is
ensuring that there is continued, long-term support for these volunteer-led
efforts, and the ability to make them effective on projects using other
languages. We've had bots making translations of formulaic articles from
one language to another for years; again, they depend on volunteers who can
maintain and support those bots, and ensure continued quality of
translation.

AI development is tough. It is monumentally expensive. Big players have
invested billions USD trying to develop working AI, with some of the most
talented programmers and developers in the world, and they're barely
scratching the surface.  I don't see this as a priority for the Wikimedia
movement, which achieves considerably higher quality with volunteers
following a fairly simple rule set that the volunteers themselves develop
based on tried and tested knowledge.  Let's let those with lots of money
keep working to develop something that is useful, and then we can start
seeing if it can become feasible for our use.

 I envision the AI industry being similar to the computer hardware
industry. My first computer cost about the same (in 2022 dollars) as the
four computers and all their peripherals that I have within my reach as I
write this, and had less than 1% of the computing power of each of
them.[1]  The cost will go down once the technology gets better and more
stable.

Risker/Anne

[1] Comparison of 1990 to 2022 dollars.



On Fri, 30 Dec 2022 at 01:40, Yaroslav Blanter  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> just to remark that it superficially looks like a great tool for small
> language Wikipedias (for which the translation tool is typically not
> available). One can train the tool in some less common language using the
> dictionary and some texts, and then let it fill the project with a
> thousands of articles. (As an aside, in fact, one probably can train it to
> the soon-to-be-extint languages and save them until the moment there is any
> interest for revival, but nobody seems to be interested). However, there is
> a high potential for abuse, as I can imagine people not speaking the
> language running the tool and creating thousands of substandard articles -
> we have seen this done manually, and I would be very cautious allowing this.
>
> Best
> Yaroslav
>
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2022 at 4:57 AM Raymond Leonard <
> raymond.f.leonard...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As a friend wrote on a Slack thread about the topic, "ChatGPT can
>> produce results that appear stunningly intelligent, and there are things
>> that I’ve seen that really leave me scratching my head- “how on Earth
>> did it DO that?!?”  But it’s important to remember that it isn’t actually
>> intelligent.  It’s not “thinking.”  It’s more of a glorified version of
>> autosuggest.  When it apologizes, it’s not really apologizing, it’s just
>> finding text that fits the self description it was fed and that looks
>> related to what you fed it."
>>
>> The person initiating the thread had asked ChatGPT "What are the 5
>> biggest intentional communities on each continent?" (As an aside, this
>> was as challenging as the question that led to Wikidata, "What are the ten
>> largest cities in the world that have women mayors?") One of the answers
>> ChatGPT gave for Europe was "Ikaria (Greece)". As near as I can determine,
>> there is no intentional community of any size in Ikaria. However, the
>> Icarians <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icarians> were a 19th-century
>> intentional community in the US founded by French expatriates. It was named
>> after a utopian novel, *Voyage en Icarie*, that was written by Étienne
>> Cabet. He chose the Greek island of Icaria as the setting of his utopian
>> vision. Interesting that ChatGPT may have conflated these.
>>
>> It seems that given a prompt, ChatGPT shuffles & regurgitates facts. Just
>> as a card dealer deals a good hand, sometimes ChatGPT seems to make sense,
&g

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Vote for your favourite sound logo

[Risker]

Wow, I'm really impressed at the quality of these proposed sound logos.
It's going to be hard to choose!

Thank you to all of the contributors, organizers, and volunteer screeners.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 6 Dec 2022 at 11:53, Festus Yemi  wrote:

> This sounds very interesting to me. I Can't wait to hear the most voted
> sound logo for the leading online encyclopedia  .
>
> Regards,
> Festus
>
> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022, 4:52 PM Linda Lenrow Lopez <
> llenrowlo...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> I can't vote, but just wanted to send a note to say it was wonderful to
>> hear all of the potential final sound logos. There are so many
>> wonderful ones it will be hard to choose a single sound.
>> One consideration that could have been included in the How to Vote
>> section - the sound should be one people would not tire of hearing
>> frequently...as we do indeed hope they will hear it often!
>>
>>
>> Linda Lenrow Lopez (she/her)
>>
>> Enterprise Risk Management Principal
>>
>> Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
>>
>> We are not in a post fact world
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQ4ba28-oGs>
>>
>>
>>
>> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
>> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate.
>> <https://donate.wikimedia.org/>
>>
>> *Curious? Here are 7 reasons to consider donating.
>> <https://medium.com/freely-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge/7-reasons-you-should-donate-to-wikipedia-fda4d0fab8d0>*
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 10:23 AM Mehrdad Pourzaki 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> Voting <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sound_Logo_Vote> in
>>> the Wikimedia sound logo contest has started [1]. Crowds, pages turning,
>>> drums, chimes, vocals, and the sound of keyboards typing. Wikimedia is
>>> alive with sound, music, and everything in between. From December 6 to 19,
>>> 2022, please play a part
>>> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sound_Logo_Vote> and help
>>> identify the Sound of All Human Knowledge. Voting is open until 19
>>> December, 23:59 UTC. Learn more on Diff
>>> <https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/12/06/vote-for-the-sound-of-all-human-knowledge/>
>>> [2].
>>>
>>> The sound logo team is grateful to everyone who participated in this
>>> global contest. We received 3,235 submissions from 2,094 participants in
>>> 135 countries. We are incredibly grateful to the team of volunteer
>>> screeners
>>> <https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/10/31/screening-3235-sound-submissions/>
>>> and the selection committee
>>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Sound_Logo/Contest_proposal#How_will_the_final_selection_happen?>
>>> who, among others, helped to bring us to where we are today. It is now up
>>> to Wikimedia to choose its sound logo.
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> The sound logo team
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] Vote for the Sound of All Human Knowledge:
>>> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Sound_Logo_Vote
>>> [2] Learn more on Diff:
>>> https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/12/06/vote-for-the-sound-of-all-human-knowledge/
>>> [3] Screening 3235 submissions:
>>> https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/10/31/screening-3235-sound-submissions/
>>> [4] The Selection Committee:
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications/Sound_Logo/Contest_proposal#How_will_the_final_selection_happen
>>> ?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Mehrdad Pourzaki*
>>> Lead Movement Communications Specialist
>>> wikimediafoundation.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/LWW77MLYX22O3Q5MJSA5L43YZGYGBQPO/
>>> 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.wiki

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing Wiki Loves Africa 2022 International Winners!!!

[Risker]

What wonderful images and videos!  Congratulations to all of the winners.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 10 Oct 2022 at 09:20, Ceslause Ogbonnaya 
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> 2022 Winners Announced: Exquisite views of what “Home” means across Africa
> are expressed in the International Wiki Loves Africa 2022 winners.
>
>
>
> 1st Prize US$2000.: A Nubia
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_Nubia.jpg> by Summering2018
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Summering2018> (Egypt)
> 2nd Prize US$1500: Home is My Work 2
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Home_is_my_work_2.jpg> by Mohamed
> Hozyen <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Hozyen> (Egypt)
> 3rd Prize US$1000: Planning Ahead
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Planning_Ahead.jpg> by Ayorinde
> Ogundele <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ayorinde_Ogundele>
>  (Nigeria)
> Wiki Loves Africa 2022 Best Video: Dream Home
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dream_Home_Wiki_Loves_Africa_2022_By_Green_Wilfred_Somoni.webm>
>  by Green Wilfred Somoni
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Green_Wilfred_Somoni> (Nigeria)
>
> Wiki Loves Africa 2022 Special Collection: Myousry
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Myousry> photo essay Windows
> Stories
> <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wiki_Loves_Africa_2022/Winners/Special_collection>Selected
> from 16,265 entries by an international jury of 12 professional
> photographers and Commonists, the Wiki Loves Africa 2022 winning images and
> video can be found here: https://bit.ly/WLA22Winners
>
>
> Thanks to all who participated! Through your lens, you are changing
> perspectives of our incredible continent. Wiki Loves Africa is the annual
> visual celebration of Africa, and is a project of Wiki In Africa.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Ceslause Ogbonnaya
> ___
> 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/G3KV3JWFB7SVWBQWJQXPBD5OPXZMCE64/
> 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/BYFBIVYIPT3ZINXTD2WK3DWIANTDRXMS/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out!

[Risker]

Hi Gerard (and everyone else) -

I join with others in saying that links to other newsletters published on
our various projects, and in various languages, would be a really valuable
addition to this list.  Many of us would really like to learn about what
different projects consider to be important. I'd really like to encourage
that other newsletter links be posted on this list.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 07:31, Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> The problem with the arguments made in the Signpost is that they represent
> English Wikipedia and adhere to what some consider what the pov of
> Wikipedia should be. As a pov it is fine but I do consider it not a
> publication that is representative. As such I do not need the
> advertisements for its publication.
> Thanks,
>
>
> On Mon, 3 Oct 2022 at 06:50, WereSpielChequers <
> werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> While the Signpost is hosted on the English Wikipedia and started as very
>> much an EN Wiki venture, it aspires to be of more general interest. Looking
>> at that specific issue, yes there is much that is mainly English Wikipedia
>> focused, including a small contribution of mine. But some of the content,
>> such as about the WMF elections is of general community interest, and at
>> least one story is about Wikimedia Commons rather than Wikipedia.
>>
>> WSC
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2022 16:35:35 +0200
>>> From: Gerard Meijssen 
>>> Subject: [Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out!
>>> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
>>> Message-ID:
>>> >> f...@mail.gmail.com>
>>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
>>> boundary="c55e2e05e9fa0636"
>>>
>>> Hoi,
>>> De Signpost is een publicatie van de Engelse Wikipedia. Waarom wordt de
>>> Wikimedia mailing list daarmee lastig gevallen?
>>> Vriendelijke groet,
>>>GerardM
>>>
>>> On Sat, 1 Oct 2022 at 14:26, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>> Name: not available
>>>
>>>
>>> End of Wikimedia-l Digest, Vol 613, Issue 1
>>> ***
>>>
>> ___
>> 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/EW26JDC3PO2J4TO4K7VODOJ7R4CI75JR/
>> 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/WGGKF3VFLEDRBQHLNHXZOA4L6ZLNJ6JK/
> 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/OEAR5Y24T2FMU6Y4BUUHVSDPHGIFMTVP/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Reflections about Visa situation for Wikimedians

[Risker]

I see where you are coming from, Mike.  At the same time, there is
something fundamentally different about an in-person event. From my own
experience, some of the most valuable learnings I have taken from in-person
events have been completely unplanned; in particular, developing personal
relationships with people from other parts of the world or from other
projects. We should be doing our best to ensure that people from all over
the world have the opportunity to have these experiences, as they have been
fundamental to our growth as a movement.  A lunchtime walk, a random
encounter at breakfast, or a casual introduction has often turned into an
action plan to collaborate.  These things don't really happen during online
meetings and conferences.

There are also plenty of issues with online meetings, too.  Connectivity
problems, software challenges, and the fact that it's much more difficult
to socialize online are just the beginning.

Hybrid, yes.  But it is critical that we don't consider the presence of
those who face greater challenges in attending in-person as non-essential.
Their ability to participate in the same way as someone from a country with
easy access is, in some ways, even more important.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 at 13:51, Mike Peel  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Rather than worrying about visa problems, why not use the experiences
> we've learnt over the last few years with virtual meetings? Make sure
> that the meeting is fully hybrid - with remote attendees being able to
> participate equally with those in person? Wouldn't that be a fairer
> approach to make sure that all who need to attend can do so?
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
>
>
___
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/CVRMU46EBKY7W24OAUBJBGQDE7GYPDVC/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Reflections about Visa situation for Wikimedians

[Risker]

Anass raises a critical point. As a community, we are broadly diverse and
inclusive; however, that does not eliminate either intentional or
unintentional biases that are external to our own organization.  This was
an issue *before* 2020, and some methods had been found to mitigate the
impact of policies of various governments (e.g., invitation letters,
appointed individuals to liaise directly with local immigration
departments, etc.)

I believe that the pandemic has significantly worsened the biases of
immigration policies in many countries.  For example, many countries
require expensive testing and vaccination proof, and limit what vaccines
are acceptable, even if those vaccines or testing facilities are not
available in all areas of the world. More countries are requiring in-person
interviews at embassies and consulates before issuing visas, despite the
fact that many of the same countries have reduced staffing at those
offices.  The bias is particularly obvious for those who live in Africa and
most of Asia.

There are a few things that can be done structurally within our own
organizations.

   - Finalize dates for conferences/meetings as early as possible, and a
   minimum of 4 months in advance, and then ensure that the
   dates/locations/times/purpose of the conference/meeting is published on a
   Wikimedia-related site. This gives invitees a link to prove that the
   conference is, in fact, taking place.
   - Ensure that registration is opened very early (minimum 3 months in
   advance) and include a tick box asking if the registrant needs an
   invitation letter. Automatically send that invitation letter the day that
   the registration is accepted.
   - We know that certain meetings are going to happen on an annual basis
   (e.g., Wikimedia Summit, CEE conference,etc.) Local organizations can
   decide even in advance of the meeting date being announced whether they
   will want to send someone, and select that individual so they can start the
   visa acquisition process as soon as possible.
   - It's not possible for the groups/departments organizing travel to keep
   current on *all* of the issues for every locality; first off, they have
   been changing so frequently, even immigration professionals have a hard
   time tracking it, and secondly there are often very localized issues such
   as unexpected and poorly publicized closures of consulates, etc.  If
   someone is interested in attending an international event, they have some
   responsibility to be aware of local circumstances.
   - It would be very helpful if conference organizers arrange for a "point
   person" to liaise with the appropriate local authorities to facilitate visa
   applications.

Those are just off the top of my head.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 at 12:36, Željko Blaće  wrote:

> This is sad to hear and brings back memories of filling similarly myself.
>
> To keep thinks very pragmatic I would advise that IFA.de and/or local
> Goethe Institute be contacted and invited to both part take and help with
> this. Both are likely to be willing and interested in support WMDE as they
> do cultural programming around related topics.
>
> Wikimedia should be a self referential bubble but both give and ask
> support for its work, even when it is late and no professional is assigned
> specifically to work on this.
>
> Best Z. Blace
>
> On Tuesday, August 16, 2022, Mohammed Bachounda 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> There is always a country that is accessible for some and difficult for
>> others, yet I experienced the same situation this year, and I was pushed to
>> make difficult decisions to cancel with continuous stress.
>>
>> I add that some visas are issued with only one entry and a duration of
>> only one week, if someone plans to return to the same country or the same
>> space, he has to re-submit another one. and it is also another story and
>> another galley, which brings up all the fears and doubts every time
>> Even though the WM summit team has done a very good job and with new
>> improvements year after year. It is also difficult year after year to get a
>> Schengen visa.
>>
>> I understand the problem between the budget allocated to transport and
>> accommodation in each country for any conference but only this constraint,
>> we lose more than we want to gain.
>>
>> It is time to establish a list // a guide // a recommendation of a place
>> where the balance between all the constraints are realized.
>> Technology + Budget + Free movement + Security etc.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Mohammed B <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Bachounda>achounda
>>
>>
>> Le mar. 16 août 2022 à 15:56, Iolanda Pensa  a écrit :
>>
>>>

[Wikimedia-l] Re: The new Signpost is out

[Risker]

Apologies, this was my moderation mistake.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 12:01, Rexogamer  wrote:

> The site's certificate seems to have expired and this doesn't seem
> on-topic..?
>
> On Tue, 28 Jun 2022 at 16:26,  wrote:
>
>>
>> https://generaltech.org/2022/06/18/how-to-find-kg-fashions-in-stores-near-you/
>> ___
>> 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/V252JYHTHV3J6DXTCCKVT7UDICWMT5M7/
>> 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/XLQV7IOYX3UHRGM4DY7BH3HAUJOVZGJT/
> 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/6VC3FUX7ADBNNUZVSYLWVF5MCPZLBWJM/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Join the new Movement Strategy Forum community review

[Risker]

Just to change the subject for a short minute:

This is a Board of Trustees election.  It is supposed to be managed by
the Elections
Committee
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_committee>,
a Board-appointed committee of community members.  Their mandate was
reviewed and updated within the past month by Board resolution. (Yes, I
know this used to be the "affiliate-selected" round, but now that it is an
election, things have changed.)

Is there a reason why every single communication I have seen about this
election has been authored by staff members, none of whom are listed as
staff support for the committee?  Did the Elections Committee carry out a
consultation with the community to make this significant change in the
manner in which candidate questions will be handled, as is indicated by
their charter?

There's a reason why these elections have never been managed by WMF staff -
I think anyone could see the conflict of interest if they were to do so -
and the Elections Committee or a committee selected by affiliates has
handled these matters to date.  I'd like to know why this does not seem to
be the case in this election.

You may now wish to return to your previous discussions about where to talk
about this election.  Please excuse my interruption.  /s

Risker/Anne
___
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/37GVGTPROHJ5WLDTXB3IIZK4F4O5F6UQ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Selena Deckelmann joins as Chief Product & Technology Officer

[Risker]

Welcome to Wikimedia, Selena. It is very good to see this role being filled
by someone with your level of experience - especially your experience in
the open source and free knowledge communities.

I am sure many people will be looking forward to meeting you and getting to
work with you, even those of us in the non-tech/non-product areas.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 at 13:24, Selena Deckelmann 
wrote:

> Hello!
>
> I’m so excited to join you all, and I am grateful to Maryana and the many
> people I’ve met on my journey to today’s announcement. Thank you for this
> opportunity to introduce myself!
>
> My grandfather was a TV repairman and I grew up watching him tinker and
> fix things, but college was when I decided to explore electronics and
> computers. I started college thinking that I would play jazz violin and
> maybe get a chemistry degree! A year later, I’d learned about the Internet
> which resulted in skipping classes to install Linux from floppy disks, and
> landing a job at a help desk.
>
> My first programming language was TI-Basic
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI-BASIC>, and my second was C++. I spent
> many years with Perl (I’ve had dreams in Perl!), SQL
> <https://www.reddit.com/r/SQL/comments/doukj2/is_sql_considered_codingprogramming/>
> and later Python, and I’ve dabbled with wikis, including Federated Wiki and
> MediaWiki. I admire Ursula Franklin
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursula_Franklin> and love her book The
> Real World of Technology.
>
> As I explored computers back in college, I felt compelled to share. The
> experience didn’t feel complete if I was alone. I vividly remember the
> people I connected with – who mentored me, who I wrote software with and
> who just listened. My love for the internet, its freedoms and
> connectedness, came from discovering a world of knowledge freely shared
> beyond anything I had imagined before.
>
> During my interviews with Wikimedia, I felt that strong connection again.
> I heard each person share their reasons for joining this movement and their
> hopes for its future – often in the form of very challenging questions!
>
> In the last few years, I’ve worked on problems at the intersection of
> Mozilla’s mission to help create an internet for the benefit of
> individuals, and its business. Very recently, this work resulted in
> shipping Total Cookie Protection, making several major changes to the UX of
> Firefox and launching a small advertising business called Firefox Suggest,
> designed with lean data practices from the start. I loved doing this work
> because of the difficulty of it, how intensely those involved had to work
> to understand one another and the communities they served, and that my
> pragmatic optimism had a part to play in getting things shipped.
>
> I also reflected on this moment in my own life: I grew up in Montana
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana>, where I attended public school.
> I love talking about, reading about
> <https://www.caseyjohnston.net/ask-a-swole-woman-archive/2021/10/23/how-do-i-even-get-started-with-lifting-weights>
> and sometimes doing weightlifting. I’m hapa
> <https://www.janm.org/exhibits/hapa-me>, and I met the Chinese part of my
> family as an adult. I think privacy and freedom
> <https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2175406> are
> intimately connected, and that exercising freedoms is a good way to keep
> them. I’m married to a high school teacher, and I have two kids who love to
> crash video meetings, including my interviews with the Wikimedia
> Foundation.
>
> All of that, together, is why I’m joining the Foundation. Wikipedia is the
> promise of collaboration on the internet and the movement for free
> knowledge made good on, in practice not in theory. I believe that Wikimedia
> projects have successfully demonstrated a model that produces trustworthy
> knowledge, and have created a home on the internet that the world
> profoundly trusts. I want to help make and ship things to advance free
> knowledge using the skills I have, while also continuing to learn from this
> ever expanding community of people all around the world.
>
> I plan to follow Maryana’s lead, and will start by meeting many people to
> really understand what we collectively need to create a global, equitable
> and inclusive future for free knowledge.
>
> Although I will  join officially in August, I would love to hear from
> anyone interested in sharing directly with me at sdeckelm...@wikimedia.org
> .
>
> -selena
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 10:09 AM Maryana Iskander 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> When I started in January, I  shared with you that one of my top
>> priorities
>> <http

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Accessing data on editing from a geographical area

[Risker]

Hello Heather -

The number of editors geographically located in New Zealand can be found
using Wikistats.[1] The information can be obtained in table format rather
than map format, and can be viewed as those who made 5-99 edits/month and
100+ edits/month.

Underlying IP data is usually able to be country-specific, but (speaking as
a long-time checkuser) it is nowhere near specific enough to reliably break
down into regions within a country.  There could also be privacy concerns
in releasing data on geographically quite small areas, and as far as I can
see there is no data released on any countries (or any other regions) where
there are fewer than 10 editors in an editing category.

It may be possible to ask a bot writer to gather data on the number of
edits to Wikiproject New Zealand pages for the wikis on which it exists,
and it could also probably give you a list of editors who make x edits per
year in that category; however, I see some pretty serious privacy concerns
when you are asking for a breakdown of the locations of these specific,
named editors.

You may also want to consider whether you really want data based on
"Wikiproject New Zealand" tagging, or Category:New Zealand (and all
sub-category) data. There aren't a lot of projects that have such specific
Wikiprojects, but there are quite a few more that categorize articles.

I don't write bots, but you might want to see who writes bots on English
Wikipedia and contact the bot writers directly.  Many of them write bots
that can work  cross-wiki.

Risker/Anne




[1]
https://stats.wikimedia.org/#/en.wikipedia.org/contributing/active-editors-by-country/normal|map|2022-04-30~2022-05-01|(activity-level)~5..99-edits|monthly

On Sun, 29 May 2022 at 16:59, Heather Knox via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Kia ora from Aotearoa New Zealand,
>
> The newly established User Group of Aotearoa New Zealand is interested in
> knowing more about the editing community within NZ, and those editors
> offshore who edit New Zealand pages/content. Is there any way of accessing
> data on the this to answer our questions (see below)?
> Thanks in advance,
> Heather
>
> · How many people in New Zealand regularly edit Wikipedia (say
> >100 edits in 12 months), and/or the regional distribution of these people
> within New Zealand
> · How many people in New Zealand are highly active contributors
> (say > 1000 edits in 12 months), and/or their regional location within
> New Zealand
>
> · How many Wikipedia editors (globally) regularly edit pages
> tagged with Wikiproject New Zealand (say >100 edits of WPNZ pages in 12
> months) and where are they located
>
> · Who are the most active editors (globally of Wikipedia pages
> tagged with Wikiproject New Zealand, and where they are located (say > 1000
> edits of WPNZ pages in 12 months),
>
> ___
> 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/B543AUIYE2CNUZ3GXP3KVBVOSVS766ZM/
> 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/PRY4ZXYL4AYA6L5GT3S3C7YNV2NMVSRX/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Open proxies and IP blocking

[Risker]

Those who have been around since the "early days" may remember the
nearly-routine blocks of AOL proxies on English Wikipedia, which were
completely ineffective in blocking vandals (they got issued a new IP in
seconds) and impeded good users.  It took a long time to persuade admins
and checkusers to stop those blocks.

I've been a checkuser since 2009, well before global IP blocks became
available in 2011.  I've argued against routinely blocking open proxies
(with the exception of Tor) ever since. There are times when it's entirely
appropriate to block them - there are a few that really are frequented by
bad users and spammers.  But as a routine block, I've never really heard a
good case presented.  There are rarely good reasons to globally block an IP
range; usually, only one or two projects are actually affected by problem
editors (whether logged-in or unregistered).  I know that if I wasn't an
administrator myself, I would be affected by global or local proxy blocks
on a regular basis.  For a long time, I was the main CU on English
Wikipedia that granted local IP block exemption; Enwiki is one of the
projects where global IPBE doesn't work.  I have never found a list of
projects that require local IPBE.

I've been unsuccessful in persuading my own project to liberalize the use
of IPBE, or to decrease the routine (and often automatic) blocking of
"proxies".  Those proxies being blocked include just about every VPN in the
world (including the one I use), as well as huge swaths of IPs that provide
service to African countries and other countries with less-developed
internet access.  It is definitely having an impact on the adequacy of
coverage of topics related to those regions, in my opinion.

I'm less concerned about the "protected page" issue raised by SJ.  There
are generally good reasons why those pages are protected.  They have either
been the long- or short-term target of repeated vandalism (e.g.,
biographical articles of controversial people, pages where disruptive
editing has required the application of Arbcom or other discretionary
sanctions, articles about today's news or are being discussed in the dark
corners of social media, articles that have been subject to significant
disinformation).  In almost all cases, the person trying to edit is
directed to the talk page.


Risker/Anne


On Wed, 20 Apr 2022 at 18:53, Samuel Klein  wrote:

> Thanks for mentioning this Florence.  It's affected me lately too.
> I'm not sure the Wikipedia we love is still accessible as a project to
> most of the world, including most of us.
>
> -- Blocking mobile users:  I was blocked from editing on mobile twice in
> the past two weeks.  No solution I could find to make a new account and
> leave a comment.  No way to contact the blocking admin w/o logging in,
> either.
> -- Permablocked IPs.  A friend told me they were permablocked from WP.
> looking into it, they were covered by a small IP range that had
> been blocked for a decade.
> -- Blocking VPNs, with large unhelpful banners.  I was just on the phone
> an hour ago w/ someone who maintains another online encyclopedia
> <https://edit.ewphp.org/en>, and their normal internet access [VPN] was
> blocked.  It took them a minute to realize they could get access by turning
> it off.  Then the first three pages they thought to visit were protected
> against editing. (some time ago, 14%
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Protection_statistics> of
> pageviews were to protected pages; may have increased since then)
> -- Getting an IP block exemption for people trying to avoid surveillance
> is not easy. in theory email-for-access could work, in practice most people
> who reasonably an exemption may not end up getting one or even hearing
> back. A softer-security approach would be better.
>
> Benjamin writes:
> > We would do well to remember that it was the incredibly low barrier to
> entry that was the key to Wikipedia's early success.
>
> +++.  We are raising these barriers to [apparently] try to stave off
> vandalism and spam.  But hard security like this can put an end to the
> projects, for good.  There is no more definitive end than one that seems
> mandated from within.  We need better automation, MLl models, sandboxing,
> and triage to help us *increase* the number of people who can edit, and
> can propose edits to protected pages, while decreasing the amount of
> vandalism and spam that is visible to the world.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2022 at 4:22 PM Benjamin Ikuta 
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Also relevant:
>> <https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/reitXJgJXFzKpdKyd/beware-trivial-inconveniences>
>> https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/reitXJgJXFzKpdKyd/beware-trivial-inconveniences
>>
>> We would do well to remember that it was the incredibly low barrier

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Legacy maintenance

[Risker]

I've always considered technical debt as analogous to the ongoing work
required to maintain a house.  That is, it's usually not possible to bring
everything up to best standards at once.  Priorities have to be
established.  We've already seen what large technical areas will get
focused attention for the next year or two - and they're ones that are much
more heavily used, much more critical to the function of the overall
Wikimedia projects, than Special:Book, an extension that was mainly used
only by (some) Wikimedians when it was fully functional.  This is the
correct priority.  A volunteer could, if they were so motivated, spend some
time on Special:Book, perhaps even get a grant to do so.  But addressing
the serious, mission-critical issues of Commons beats Special:Book every
day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Generally speaking, issues involving security, system integrity and the
functions used by the widest segment of our audience (which includes
Wikimedians, of course), would logically be of higher priority than a
useful but (comparatively) little used function.  In another thread, there
was mention of there being 50,000 "books" attached to English Wikipedia. We
have individual images on Commons that probably have been used more often
than that (although many of the uses may be by third parties).

Risker/Anne



On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 at 13:09, Benjamin Lees  wrote:

> I don't think "slower budget growth" means spending less.  It just means
> not spending as much more.
>
> Anyway, you can spend more on one thing, such as technical debt, and less
> on other things.
>
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 8:21 AM Gerard Meijssen 
> wrote:
>
>> Hoi,
>> In information I read the WMF intends to spend less. However, given that
>> there is a huge technical debt in maintenance, including software that is
>> currently not functional. I wonder why we intend to spend less when our
>> technical house is not in order.
>>
>> For just one example of technical debt .. Collection / Special:Book usage
>> is broken.
>>
>> So when will we address broken and missing functionality particularly
>> when it is not Wikipedia?
>> Thanks,
>>   GerardM
>>
>> ___
>> 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/RXK3TU3VSLLGWPOKELG7AS54FDVXJXLB/
>> 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/H2WEYKE6WB2NCLNNMPYNZKLOYB36MYRK/
> 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/MK4ZZ4763RFGB2BYTXLOQOIIDKPQIGXT/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Announcing the 2022 Wikimedia Hackathon

[Risker]

(re-sending on behalf of Haley Lepp)

Hello everyone!

Your friendly neighborhood Hackathon committee is thrilled to announce the
2022 Global Wikimedia Hackathon! We invite you to join us for three days of
collaborating, interactive sessions, and social fun from May 20-May 22. The
Hackathon will be held online and there will be grants available to support
local in-person meetups around the world. You can find more information
about this on our MediaWiki.org page
, which will
continue to grow over the next few weeks. For more details, read below.

Who: The Hackathon is for anyone who contributes (or wants to contribute
to) to Wikimedia’s technical areas - as code creators, maintainers,
translators, designers, technical writers and other technical roles. You
can come with a project in mind, join an existing project, or create
something new with others. The choice is yours! Newcomers are welcome.

We will send out more information on how to schedule a session in the
program soon. You can also add yourself to the participants list
, and
mention if you would like to help with tasks such as facilitation or
welcoming newcomers. There will be scholarship stipends available- please
stay tuned for more information.

What: A Wikimedia Hackathon  is
a space for the technical community to come together and work together on
technical projects, learn from each other, and make new friends.

When: May 20-May 22. The schedule will be announced shortly. We are trying
to plan events so that people in all time zones can participate
comfortably. There will be core hours several times a day when most events
will occur, and online social and hacking spaces open 24 hours a day
throughout the three days.

Where: The Hackathon will primarily be held online. However, very soon we
will share an application for local affiliates to apply for grants to host
in-person local meetups. Meetups can be anything from social gatherings
with food, to a party for watching the opening or closing ceremony, to a
pre-event workshop, to renting a venue where people can participate
together in the online event. Grants can range from 500-5000 USD. Stay
tuned for more information!

How (can you help)?:

   1.

   We are seeking another committee member! The commitment is around 3
   hours per week. If you are interested, please contact hl...@wikimedia.org
   2.

   We have an ideas page.
   What are
   you interested in? What would you like to see or do in this year’s
   hackathon? Please share your ideas with everyone! This is a community
   Hackathon and we will work together to put on a great event.
   3.

   Do you have any accessibility or translation requests? Please contact
   hl...@wikimedia.org


Cheers,

Your Hackathon Committee

Andre 

Haley 

Jay 

Lucas 

Marios 

Neslihan 

Selene



___
___
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/NTSTK5GDEYQ75FX5C46TCFS3ZGMWZCMA/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Media coverage in Germany: Enterprise / Advocacy

[Risker]

 Andreas -

First off, contract employees are employees.  There were 82 of them. (Part
V, line 1a on the Form 990)  They do not receive a W-3 form. Only 291
employees received the W-3 form.  That brings employee total to 373.

Secondly, you fail to compensate for the fact that the 13 "key employees" -
officers, the top 5 compensated non-officer staff, and other key staff -
received approximately $3.3 million alone.  That reduces the employee pool
to 360 and the compensation pool to $52.3 million.

That gives an average total compensation of about $145,000 USD.  Reportable
compensation includes pension plan contributions, medical/dental plans,
paid leaves,social security/medicare taxes, insurance, costs reimbursed for
maintaining a home office, and many other forms of direct or indirect
compensation. The benefits package would run about 25-30% of the base
salary, and other compensation will add into that.

There's no reason whatsoever to believe that the employee numbers remained
static the following year; in fact, in your other statement, your figures
would suggest you think the WMF currently has about 650-675 staff.

Risker/Anne

On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 at 21:37, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> Amir,
>
> You say, "it was only 12 were paid more than $100,000 (at least according
> to the form)."
>
> Part VII of the Form 990 (page 8) states, in line 2 (under the table of
> highest earners you mention),
>
> "Total number of individuals (including but not limited to those listed
> above) who received more than $100,000 of reportable compensation from the
> organization – *165*"
>
> That is more than half of all employees (actual employees, as opposed to
> freelancers).
>
> Andreas
>
> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 2:29 AM Amir Sarabadani 
> wrote:
>
>> The $200,000 average salary for each employee is plain wrong.
>>
>> If you look at 2019 Form:
>> https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/foundation/8/85/Wikimedia_Foundation_2019_Form_990.pdf
>> In that form, there is a section (Section VII) for the highest paid
>> employees and requires WMF to report any employee who was paid more than
>> "$100,000 from the organization and any related organizations". And only 11
>> people in all of WMF were paid more than $200,000 in that FY and the
>> highest paid employee took a little less than $400,000, and in total with
>> the rest it was only 12 were paid more than $100,000 (at least according to
>> the form).
>>
>> There are lots of complicating factors, including the fact that most WMF
>> "employees" live outside of the US and thus are hired through the Employer
>> of Record (EoR) system. So they show up as contractors in the list of staff
>> and I'm not sure where their expenses show up in Form 990. Staff
>> compensation gets adjusted to where they live and usually (virtually all
>> but not sure) it's less than salaries paid in the bay area due to the fact
>> that simply living in SF (and bay area) is expensive.
>>
>> If you combine total expenses of WMF with personnel expenses (~80M) and
>> divide that to 400 (~ number of staff in 2019), you might get $200,000 per
>> person but that includes data center expenses, buying hardware expenses,
>> network expenses, money paid for renting offices, electricity bills of the
>> dcs and offices, travel expenses, basically anything you can imagine except
>> grants.
>>
>> (In my volunteer capacity, It's weekend)
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 30, 2022 at 2:38 AM Risker  wrote:
>>
>>> I don't think there is any such source.  In another thread, Andreas also
>>> states that there are over 800 WMF and affiliate employees (which is
>>> probably true); however, that would mean that *just salaries* would come to
>>> more than the 2021-22 annual budget.[1]  (i.e. - 800 employees x $200,000
>>> each = $160 million; 2021-22 budget is $150 million. That is taking the
>>> smaller number of "over 800 employee" from the other post and "over
>>> $200,000 per employee" from this one.)  While I have no doubt that salaries
>>> and benefits make up the majority of expenditures in both the WMF itself
>>> and the WMF and affiliates together, I think these statements are
>>> exaggerations.
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Medium-term_plan_2019/Annual_Plan_2021-2022
>>>
>>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 at 20:04, Alex Monk  wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you have a source for that number?
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 at 20:38, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
>>>>
>

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Media coverage in Germany: Enterprise / Advocacy

[Risker]

I don't think there is any such source.  In another thread, Andreas also
states that there are over 800 WMF and affiliate employees (which is
probably true); however, that would mean that *just salaries* would come to
more than the 2021-22 annual budget.[1]  (i.e. - 800 employees x $200,000
each = $160 million; 2021-22 budget is $150 million. That is taking the
smaller number of "over 800 employee" from the other post and "over
$200,000 per employee" from this one.)  While I have no doubt that salaries
and benefits make up the majority of expenditures in both the WMF itself
and the WMF and affiliates together, I think these statements are
exaggerations.

Risker/Anne


[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Medium-term_plan_2019/Annual_Plan_2021-2022

On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 at 20:04, Alex Monk  wrote:

> Do you have a source for that number?
>
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 at 20:38, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
>
>>
>> As for nobody at Wikimedia profiting off the free content created by
>> volunteers, that is relative. WMF salary costs currently average over
>> $200,000 per employee. In most parts of the world, that would be considered
>> wealthy. A minor issue in the grand scheme of things, certainly, but still
>> relevant to us here at least.
>>
> ___
> 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/AW6WDMV66RGYVAGCKMNYHXVHV5KFNRLK/
> 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/TDLU5RAG57LL74Z65D3DL24WFO6WV6YV/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Board statement endorsing community voting on the enforcement guidelines for Universal code of Conduct (UCoC)

[Risker]

Andreas -

Wikimedia staff are as much a part of the community as everyone else is;
hundreds of them come from community roots, and the Wikimedia community
remains the single largest recruitment pool for roles within the WMF.  A
non-negligible percentage of WMF staff devote a very significant portion of
their non-working hours to volunteer work on our projects.

If you want to look at historic participation in elections, staff of the
WMF and other affiliates have an exceptionally low participation rate.
It's unclear why you'd think that would change - even when they have had an
opportunity to influence Board of Trustees elections (which actually do
affect them far more than the average community member), they haven't taken
advantage of that.  I'm a little concerned that you think Wikimedia staff
are so craven and ill-informed that they could be pressured to vote in that
way. Since it will no doubt be a secret ballot, there is no way for any
employer to control the outcome of this election; all they'd know is
whether or not an employee voted, not *how* they voted.  And since any
individual can only vote once, an employee could simply use their volunteer
account, which is usually much easier than having their staff name
whitelisted. Frankly, there are a dozen projects that have a far greater
potential opportunity to control the outcome.

Whatever one may believe about the draft UCoC, it is largely developed from
existing behavioural norms on several of our large projects; thus, most of
it is a summary of what volunteers on various projects have been doing, in
some cases for almost two decades.  It also reflects the experiences of the
codes of conduct that have been applied to the volunteer developer area for
several years, as well as the codes of conduct applied to most in-person
events hosted by WMF and Wikimedia affiliates for many years.

I'm not particularly worried that someone will mess up the SecurePoll, or
that it will permit decoding to the point of linking individuals to
specific votes.  Having said that, it would be realistic to have the key to
the election retained by someone outside of the direct Wikimedia community
(e.g., someone from EFF) who can be available to decode the results once
the standard checks are done.

Risker/Anne





On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 at 16:17, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> Shani,
>
> The prospect of potentially several hundred Wikimedia
> employees/contractors taking part in this vote is somewhat disturbing,
> especially in combination with a 50% threshold.
>
> Few decisions in the history of Wikipedia and Wikimedia have attracted
> participation from 1,000 or more volunteers. With a head start of 800 or
> more WMF and affiliate employees voting, who could be directed to vote as a
> block by their management, you would theoretically be able to push through
> anything, even if up to 90% of volunteers object ... (I don't think the
> UCoC, given its history, is much more popular than the rebranding was) ...
> and then declare it the result of a democratic process.
>
> Even if staff are not directed by management to participate, and are not
> directed to vote one way or another, I do not see how they (or the
> community, for that matter) can trust that this is a free and secret ballot
> for them, unless the process is administered outside the WMF.
>
> Could you say something about this?
>
> Best,
> Andreas
> ___
> 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/3HVGANIGR25HQFX25BDTI5YU4BK6YTMB/
> 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/QHYUW2MUYYS7ENFIGFG2QUVHMGAKMD2N/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia France - New board and Annual report

[Risker]

(Forwarding on behalf of Diane Ranville)


Hello dear Wikimedia community,

We are very happy to present you the latest annual report of Wikimedia
France (attached).

We would also like to introduce you to our new board, elected at our last
general meeting, with 4 new members and a new directing committee:

   - Capucine-Marin Dubroca Voisin, Chairperson *(newly elected)*
   - Jonathan Mouton, Vice-Chairperson *(newly elected in this role)*
   - Pascal Radigue, Treasurer
   - Diane Ranville, Secretary *(newly elected in this role)*
   - Julien Gardet
   - Agnes Lafourcade *(newly elected)*
   - Roger Gotlib
   - Nadine Le Lirzin
   - Pierre-Yves Beaudouin
   - Carole Renard
   - Antoine Srun *(newly elected)*
   - Cédric Tarbouriech *(newly elected)*

We would like to thank Pascale Camus-Walter and Benoît Soubeyran, whose
mandate ended on this occasion, for their commitment to the movement. We
would also like to extend our thanks to Pierre-Yves Beaudouin who, after 5
years of intense dedication as a chairperson, left his role to
Capucine-Marin, while remaining in the board to ensure continuity.

The board now includes new faces from all around France, including from
overseas territory La Réunion. It is also composed of 7 men and 5 women,
among which we are very proud to welcome our first non-binary chairperson,
Capucine-Marin (she/they), a seasoned wikimedian whose deep commitment
to free knowledge and equity will continue to show with this new role in
the movement.

Please feel free to reach out to the new board if you would like to discuss
projects or ideas.

With wikilove,
*Diane Ranville*
Secretary of Wikimédia France
___
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/O6KSPVW6YTATYBKDYW4LTOURIT6WD5QQ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: "content was" when deleting pages - is it useful?

[Risker]

Thanks for flagging this, Amir.  You're right, the reasoning isn't
particularly well documented.  I've commented on the ticket about the
reason English Wikipedia did this, which may be helpful.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 at 09:19, Amir E. Aharoni 
wrote:

> Hallo!
>
> There's an old MediaWiki feature: When an administrator deletes a page, a
> bit of its content is automatically added to an edit summary. This is later
> viewable in deletion logs.
>
> If you edit in the English, German, or Italian Wikipedia, then you haven't
> actually seen this feature in years, because administrators in these wikis
> essentially removed it by locally blanking the system messages that make it
> work.
>
> In many other wikis, however, this feature is still working.
>
> Is it actually useful? Or should it perhaps be removed?
>
> Here's a Phabricator task about it:
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T299351
>
> If you have an opinion, weigh in there or here.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- 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/4ZONY3L5LEPO45POJ2SWTPHKFFIJ63UR/
> 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/XYVCIHPA2TB6NFFMVGON5VKXI5LHU5O7/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Save the date: Movement Strategy Co-Creation Workshop on "Hubs" on November 27

[Risker]

Thank you, Cornelius.  Is there any chance that there will be a Round 2 for
this?

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 10 Nov 2021 at 13:21, Cornelius Kibelka 
wrote:

> Registration is now open and closes on November 25.
>
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 12:48 PM Cornelius Kibelka <
> ckibelka-...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> just wanted to share a quick "save the date":
>>
>> The Movement Strategy and Governance team of the Wikimedia Foundation
>> will host a co-creation workshop on the concept of "Hubs" on November 27,
>> 2021, from 13:00 to 17:00 UTC. (your timezone
>> <https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1638018002>). Registration will open
>> early next week. We are looking for participants who are working on "Hubs"
>> proposals, have engaged on that topic previously, or are planning to do so
>> in the near future.
>>
>> The overall goal of the event is convergence and alignment regarding the
>> concept of hubs and principles for the development of hubs. The idea is to
>> convene on the topic of hubs, to reach an initial definition of regional
>> and thematic hubs, and to clarify essential questions on the concept of
>> hubs (e.g. scope, responsibilities, connection to existing entities, and
>> hub life cycle). Ideally, the work done during this event will inform the
>> Movement Charter Drafting Committee and its drafting process.
>>
>> More information here:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Hubs/Workshop_November_27,_2021
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Cornelius
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Cornelius Kibelka (he/him)
>>
>> Event Coordinator
>>
>> Movement Strategy + Governance
>>
>> 2030.wikimedia.org
>>
>> <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
>>
>> *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
>> the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate.
>> <https://donate.wikimedia.org/>*
>> <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Cornelius Kibelka (he/him)
>
> Event Coordinator
>
> Movement Strategy + Governance
>
> 2030.wikimedia.org
>
> <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
>
> *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment. Donate.
> <https://donate.wikimedia.org/>*
> <https://wikimediafoundation.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/LG7JQE3E4UUPJAWN2FMLWWELYSYESKUE/
> 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/BNC5MGYF7F7JGH7EAZ67NWSEQ2HS6ZOE/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: [Marketing Mail] Re: Small gratitude to our fellow wikimedians

[Risker]

One thing to keep in mind is that there are a couple of million Wikimedia
accounts.  Just by the law of averages, it's likely that someone who has a
Wikimedia account dies every day.  Most of the time, we will never know
about it. I'd guess that a good percentage of the accounts that have been
inactive for 5-10-15 years belong to people who have passed away.  The vast
majority of accounts of deceased editors have no potentially hazardous
permissions attached to them  - there aren't *that* many administrators,
interface administrators, checkusers and oversighters across all projects -
so there is no significant risk in leaving those accounts active.  There is
no real security issue here.  The main effect of having a "deceased user"
right would be to highlight which users were popular enough to have their
death noticed by their community; most accounts of deceased users will
never be identified as such.

I've explained the "process" of how we address things on English Wikipedia,
but not even we have a formal written policy on this; as best I can tell,
most of the steps I've mentioned aren't written down anywhere, and it is
simply a practice that has developed over time and is passed from one
"generation" to another by example and word of mouth.  In fact, I'd guess
that very small projects (where almost all the editors know each other) are
even better at recognizing the contributions of deceased members than any
of the big projects.  I'm in favour of individual projects, which all have
slightly different cultures, developing their own process, but I'd suggest
it be a guideline rather than a policy.

Risker/Anne





On Tue, 9 Nov 2021 at 10:19, Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> That would enter the domain of naming guidelines and we don't have those
> in general. Again, I have been pointing out since the first years of SUL.
>
> For example a string can look terrible in one language but not another,
> you have a normal user experience in one Wikipedia, and than you realize
> that you were blocked after the first edit in another one. If we don't fix
> something like this first, which is a first-order problem on the issue of
> naming guideline, it would be very difficult to add anything else, IMHO.
>
> Alessandro
>
>
>
> Il martedì 9 novembre 2021, 16:05:41 CET, Željko Blaće  ha
> scritto:
>
>
> Maybe a good approach would be also to have a global rename of the user
> account to add something like _(.) so it is systematic and 'obvious' across
> all Wikimedia projects - no?
>
>
> ___
> 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/DNTS57ISQ5PY75UFYNW724YRKNQGEWAF/
>
> 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/6GNSZ37MGLW32H2E5RNGQERZCV65JLW6/
> 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/E27LNKOPNXM4ZHSWGS3X7QR5AALVMDRS/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Small gratitude to our fellow wikimedians

[Risker]

There are many good points raised here.

I am saddened to report that, on English Wikipedia (because of its size,
age and number of contributors), we have had a fair amount of experience in
dealing with the death of one of our colleagues. We have developed a
process that seems to work for us, and may serve as (a) a model or starting
point for other projects and (b) some useful suggestions for addressing
similar situations on a more global level.  I have had the difficult duty
of overseeing such processes on a few occasions, and post it here for
others.


   - Notification of the death of a Wikimedian may come in several
   different ways. A family member or personal friend may reach out to the
   project in different ways (frequently a post to a talk page), or they may
   contact another Wikimedian they know of who can share the news.  In a few
   tragic situations, the dealth of the Wikimedian has been the subject of
   media reports.
   - The person's privacy preferences are respected. If the person has made
   a point of *not* publicly linking their username to their personal
   information, we will not normally do so, unless there is at least agreement
   if not an active request from the family. If the family permits, we will
   link to the off-wiki obituary in many cases.
   - The person's userpage is fully protected.  We have a standard template
   that is added that basically says "this is the userpage of a deceased
   Wikipedian and it is preserved in their memory" (Paraphrased)
   - Their talk page is archived, and a new section created where what
   information is available is posted.  Colleagues from across the project
   will post in this section to express their thoughts and extend condolences
   to the family and friends of the deceased.  If there is a fellow editor who
   is in contact with the family, they will send links to the family so that
   they can read the condolences.
   - All user rights associated with the account are removed; if the person
   was an administrator, this requires Bureaucrat attention. If the person is
   a checkuser, oversighter, or steward, removal of those permissions is
   handled by stewards at  Meta.
   - Where applicable, pages where the username of the deceased are
   included will be modified.
   - Stewards are contacted to globally lock the account.  This may be
   delayed for a short period if the deceased editor's linked email address is
   being used for communication with the family, because locking an account
   also prevents use of email.
   - The name of the deceased, along with (usually) a brief discussion of
   their editing activity, is posted at our project's "In Memoriam" page.
   Some editors who have had a significant impact on our project may be
   remembered in a fairly extensive obituary, often written in true
   collaborative style by colleagues whose wiki-lives have been affected by
   the deceased.
   - In most cases, additional notices will be posted on project talk
   spaces where the deceased was active, and sometimes to noticeboards as
   well.
   - Our "local" news paper ("The Signpost") will normally be informed, and
   there is often a news report about it in the next scheduled addition.
   - (A newer addition to the process) If the deceased was included as a
   user with access to nonpublic information, an edit is made to the talk page
   of the noticeboard
   
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Access_to_nonpublic_personal_data_policy/Noticeboard>,
   and the WMF staff managing that page will remove their name (and carry out
   whatever internal processes are required).


I think the page on Meta that has been pointed out is a good start for
centralizing the recognition of our colleagues who have died.  As is
plainly obvious, many of our former colleagues were active on more than one
project.  I have a couple of suggestions for improvement of the page:

   - It might be helpful to add the date of death, or at least the year of
   death.
   - When identifying the projects in which the deceased was active, a link
   to their user talk page and/or any other page that has been used to collect
   condolences or serves as an obituary, would be helpful.  I think it might
   be better to express condolences at the local rather than the global level,
   but that is simply my opinion.

I hope this might prove helpful to colleagues on all projects who may have
to deal with this situation in the future.

Risker/Anne
English Wikipedia

On Mon, 8 Nov 2021 at 23:09, Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Thank you very much for starting this thread.
>
> I think that's a very important topic. I have been working on related
> portals for several years now and I am always available to provide my
> little inputs wherever I can. Some projects have their project space:
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4655446 (see the sitelinks), I agree that
> we may think of working on global best practices now (

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Manavpreet Kaur's role in AffCom's issues

[Risker]

 I think at this point it is time to take this matter off this mailing
list.  I think we have all learned more than we ever expected to know about
the Wikimedia Slovakia user group.

It is unfortunate that the software doesn't permit locking of threads.

Risker/Anne
___
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/CRLGIAFSP7MZG536436R5VPBLX3AOKIU/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Subject: Re: Manavpreet Kaur's role in AffCom's issues

[Risker]

I think at this point it is time to take this matter off this mailing
list.  I think we have all learned more than we ever expected to know about
the Wikimedia Slovakia user group.

Risker/Anne
___
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/XHH4BPSLB3TGDPQ3REAWRTWPG4Q2KHSJ/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Investigation of possible AffCom's violations - your input welcomed!

[Risker]

KuboF, I have read your email, but I am none the wiser. Please explain
precisely what your concerns are. In what way is AffCom not following the
WMF guiding principles?

Risker/Anne

On Sun, 24 Oct 2021 at 18:18, Michal Matúšov 
wrote:

> Hi wikimedians, especially functionaries of affiliations!
>
> If nothing substantial will change, in about 2 weeks I am going to start a
> formal investigation of possible AffCom's violations of Wikimedia
> Foundation Guiding Principles [1].
>
> During last months and especially weeks I have noticed several issues
> about AffCom which showed up to hinder work and development of Wikimedia
> affiliations. While I have originally considered them to be exceptions,
> they have shown a consistent pattern through time indicating possible
> structural weakness. I have already asked AffCom non-publicly about some
> elements of them and AffCom's answers (respectively lack of them) for now
> show it to be higher probable that the issues are real and structural.
>
> In order to make the investigation more efficient and productive I need
> your help! If you during last year experienced non-trivial issues with
> AffCom, especially if they hindered your affiliation (holding up your
> recognition with lack of reasonable communication, non-action to prevent
> violations of agreements, very slow work, communication of
> false information etc etc etc), please let me know personally
> (non-publicly, outside of the list) by email (possibly by sending email
> using Meta [2]). I much prefer if you are willing to accept that in case of
> investigation I could identify you and your affiliation. But as I
> understand that such identification could possibly make AffCom more prone
> to target its issues towards you and your affiliation, I accept to receive
> your evidence and make a reasonable effort to anonymize it (paraphrasing
> your words, getting the essence of the experience without specifics - or to
> not use it if it would be unreasonable to anonymize it). Please, write 
> "*AffCom
> investigation*" (without parenthesis) in the title, so I can find it more
> easily! Many thanks!
>
> Last, but urgent related affair:
> As *AffCom's Staff Liaison Manavpreet Kaur* is currently a candidate for
> the very responsible role of Movement Charter Drafting Committee member, I
> have asked her about her involvement in AffCom's issues and the possibility
> for her to "import" the AffCom-like issues to the Movement Charter Drafting
> Committee [3] [4]. I am sorry for not starting this conversation publicly
> sooner! (I have checked the candidates too lately and also needed some time
> to prepare the message, as it must be very precise) I know that such
> information would be very interesting for many of you and would help you in
> your voting decision. (In a similar way I wanted to challenge Rosie
> Stephenson-Goodknight during her candidacy for community elected Board of
> Trustees seat several months ago, as she in that time was the AffCom's
> Chair. Unfortunately, I have too lately considered her possible role in
> AffCom's issues to be potentially significant. Sorry again!)
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles
> [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:EmailUser/KuboF_Hromoslav
> [3]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Manavpreet_Kaur#Your_role_in_AffCom's_issues_in_relation_to_your_Movement_Charter_Drafting_Committee_member_candidacy
> [4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/22235789
>
> Best regards!
> KuboF Hromoslav (Michal Matúšov)
> ___
> 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/D7XUOJ3YOQ4KAFHSAUCI7WA2KAFN24XN/
> 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/WBETDE263GXT6RWXRMEP66OCDM3SBDBW/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

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

[Risker]

Just for the record, the Wikimedia Foundation Election Committee
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_committee>
has been a standing committee since 2015, and reports to the Board
Governance Committee.  It is tasked with making recommendations on how
elections are carried out, and specifically is responsible for community
elections to the Board of Trustees, the FDC and the FDC ombuds, as well as
" Similar community-selected positions as determined by the Wikimedia
Foundation Board of Trustee
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_of_Trustees>s".
To the best of my knowledge, the Elections Committee has had no involvement
in the MCDC election, and there's no indication at all that the Board asked
them to assist or to manage the election.  I would really like to see a
couple of stewards acting as scrutineers for this election, simply because
they are really experienced at identifying the kinds of problems that turn
up on elections like this (you'd be surprised how often there are issues, I
certainly was when I was on the EC), and the Strategy folks who are in
charge of the election already have more than enough on their plate.
DISCLOSURE:  I am a candidate in this election.

I am curious what is meant by a "7-member district".  Lodewijk, could you
explain in more detail?

What isn't really obvious is that at the same time as the content
management community is carrying out this single-transferable-vote
election, a special committee representing affiliates from different
geographic areas is also, in parallel, selecting 6 people from exactly the
same list of candidates.  Thus, we have the same slate of candidates
running simultaneously in two separate elections, competing for 7
community-selected seats and 6 affiliate-selected seats.  As a candidate, I
find this situation quite uncomfortable. It's not well understood, and the
number of candidates makes the selection process much more complex for both
groups.  I hope that for the STV election, we see exactly the type  of
results that we saw for the Trustee election a few weeks ago, in the same
format, so that it is very clear how the STV process worked in this case.
I understand and accept that the affiliate selection process is going to be
very different, and there will be a fair amount of negotiation to come up
with the most favoured result, but since there's a reasonable chance at
least some of their selected candidates will be selected already by the
community, they'll need to ensure they have a final selection of at least
13 people so that any duplicates or otherwise ineligible candidates (due to
the 2-per-wiki rule) will still result in filing all the seats.


Risker/Anne


On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 at 12:47, effe iets anders 
wrote:

> There's that, +1 for sure.
>
> But even within the current limitations, there are some configuration
> options that could have been chosen to improve user experience. For
> example, various WMF staff members have communicated different cutoff
> points when people shouldn't have to worry about their ranking any longer.
> Great. But this is hidden in a wall of text. A more user friendly way would
> have been to actually limit the interface to the top-X positions, if you
> can show with some basic simulations that this is indeed the reasonable
> cutoff.
>
> Not that this would have been a 'good' voting method by any standard with
> rank-top15 but it would be 70/15 times less painful :)
>
> It's also odd that I have to discover the first-letter-trick. There may be
> more tricks out there! I honestly was fully expecting that the WMF would
> have fixed the software before setting up the vote, so I didn't give it
> another thought. But a few of these pain points could have been clearer if
> there would have been a test period with a few volunteers... (although I
> assume at least the election committee was thoroughly consulted)
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 4:30 AM Jan Ainali  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for your reply Kaarel,
>>
>> I just wanted to note that UI of SecurePoll caused problem in the board
>> election too, and that the same excuse was used then "in a short time
>> once". Obviously this is a piece of infrastructure that we need in the
>> movement and that any team doing one election should not need to fix the
>> software for it.
>>
>> Hence, a specific project, unrelated to any election, should be tasked to
>> solve this by the Wikimedia Foundation. And it should start soon to avoid
>> us finding ourselves in the same problem when the next election is being
>> called.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jan Ainali
>>
>>
>> Den mån 18 okt. 2021 kl 13:02 skrev Kaarel Vaidla > >:
>>
>>> Thank you everyone for taking the time to vote on

[Wikimedia-l] Re: 100$ million dollars and still obsolete

[Risker]

Jonathan's comment made me smile.  To be honest, it's something that
crossed my mind too.  I mean...the Wikipedia community can have endless
arguments about the use of the Oxford comma.  We are masters at arguing
over what colour the bikeshed should be.  There are definitely times where
developer actions have caused sufficient harm that the Wikimedia community
is up in arms; this is not an organization where "move fast and break
things" works very well.  Unfortunately, those relatively rare occurrences
are what people remember all the time.  We don't remember that these same
teams have worked out systems so that we no longer have a situation where
every time an upgrade is loaded, it breaks the big projects.  We don't
remember that multiple-hour-long downtimes were commonplace.  We don't
remember that, in fact, a very significant amount of editing is done on the
mobile site. (There used to be a report about that but I've no idea where
to find it now.)  It's the human condition to remember situations that have
made us unhappy or even angry, while situations that have little obvious
impact are completely forgotten.  Bottom line, the developers have made
tens of thousands of improvements to the site that rarely, if ever, get
noted or even recognized. We only remember the times when they've done
something that really caused problems.

A lot of the challenges that are faced by designers and developers have to
do with inconsistent or narrow feedback from the editorial community, not
to mention diametrically opposed requests to change the same thing in
different ways.  It's one thing to say that X is really awful. It's another
thing to work with a cross-section of the community (i.e. hundreds of
people, if not thousands across several projects) to figure out what
improvements to X should look like, and gain consensus on those desired
improvements.  For every person who complains about X being awful, there
are often an equal or greater number of people saying "don't touch X! I
rely on it being exactly as it is!"

It's important and valuable to start these discussions, but let's not start
off with "this group isn't doing its job the way I think they should".
Let's start with "how can I influence the community to identify what needs
to be improved, and get agreements that the developers can count on in
order to proceed."

And yes, I know full well how very hard this is, for everyone involved.
It's not a criticism of anyone participating in this thread.

Risker/Anne





On Thu, 14 Oct 2021 at 17:35, Jonathan Morgan 
wrote:

> It's not an issue of "WMF can't hire enough designers" or "WMF can't hire
> good designers".
>
> I worked for WMF in a design-adjacent role for the better part of a
> decade. WMF has *excellent *designers, and in sufficient numbers to build
> a modern user interface on desktop--one that *looks* modern and also
> prioritizes the needs of Wikipedia's readers (editors can always load up an
> old skin if they don't like the new one).
>
> The mobile site and Wikipedia apps have a much more modern look-and-feel
> and are clearly focused on making Wikipedia "work" for its largest set of
> users: readers. If the desktop site lags on the design side, that may be
> because when WMF has tried to make UI changes to the desktop site in the
> past, or even just proposed them, they've received loud and angry push back
> from members of a second (smaller, but equally important) set of users:
> editors.
>
> WMF, understandably, tries to avoid angering editors (believe it or not).
>
> At the software company I work for now, if we make a change that annoys
> our users--pretty much all of whom are "power users" with needs every bit
> as complex and idiosyncratic as your average Admin--we hear about it. But
> no one threatens to disable that change across the platform. And it's
> relatively rare for a user to accuse us of being stupid or lazy or
> malicious--at least, its rare on for that to happen on public mailing lists
> or in our own forums.
>
> That doesn't mean the stakes are any lower: if we make the software worse,
> we probably lose customers. But we have the autonomy to make the changes in
> the first place, see what happens, and then build from there or fix our
> mistakes or even roll things back if we need to.
>
> WMF product teams work in an environment where their competence and good
> faith are frequently, and publicly, called into question. An environment
> where one set of end users (editors) has a great deal of both *soft* and
> *hard* power to block changes, even when those changes are intended
> for--and indeed, primarily affect--a different set of end users (readers).
>
> Speaking as someone who worked inside of that environment, I can say that
> it can feel like even targeted, clearly motivated an

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

[Risker]

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

[Wikimedia-l] Re: WMF Product department transition

[Risker]

Ah Toby.  I am going to miss you a lot, and I think that you are leaving
some very big shoes to fill.

It has been a pleasure to work with someone from Product who "gets" the
community and has taken feedback from the community seriously and used that
feedback to improve the experience for editors and readers. This can be a
big challenge, because I wouldn't exactly say the community is unified in
what they consider "improvements".

I wish you well on your continuing journey.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 12 Oct 2021 at 13:36, Toby Negrin  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I’m writing to share that I’ve decided to step down as Chief Product
> Officer at the Wikimedia Foundation and my last day will be November 1.
>
> I’ve said before that I believe this is the most interesting job in the
> world. After all, what happens in the world happens on Wikipedia. I have
> felt incredibly fortunate to be a part of this movement, working on some of
> the most urgent problems around knowledge and access that we face today.
>
> I first joined the Foundation in 2013 as the Director of Analytics, and if
> you had told me back then that I would end up staying for eight years, I
> would never have believed you. Eight years is a long time. I am proud of
> the work that this department has done, and I will take many lessons with
> me. And at the same time, I’ve also realized I’m ready for the next chapter
> in my career.
>
> As I leave the Foundation, I want to express my deep gratitude to all of
> you - the volunteers who have built these projects into what they are
> today. Your contributions, your knowledge and your time have created these
> projects that have become the largest collection of open knowledge in human
> history. Every technology leader seeks passionate, engaged users who are
> actively sharing feedback on the platforms they build. This community has
> never let us down in that regard. Our work together between the communities
> and the Product department wasn’t always easy, but on the whole we operated
> under an assumption of good faith[1] and with a recognition of our
> respective roles in helping improve the reading and editing experience of
> our projects. I’m immensely proud of the work that we’ve accomplished and
> the chance to work alongside so many talented people.
>
> The Wikimedia Foundation was the first nonprofit of my career. At the
> time, it was a welcome change and a chance to use my skills for good. I
> have seen the Foundation go through many iterations and transitions. I’m
> proud to have been part of its incredible growth and the increasing impact
> we are making in the world. There have been many successes and many
> challenges too, as we have tackled the new realities of the internet, and
> sought to make our projects truly global and inclusive. In considering all
> of this, now feels like the right time for me to step back and get closer
> to why I became an engineer in the first place —  being a builder and a
> developer. I’ve been energized by the work of this department and this
> movement, bringing values of privacy, respect for users, inclusion and
> safety to building on the open web. I hope to carry these forward as I take
> on a more hands-on role in technology innovation in my next chapter.
>
> Thank you to everyone that I’ve had the chance to work with on powering
> some of the most innovative work on the open web. I cannot wait to see what
> you all achieve next.
>
> Cheers,
> Toby
> --
> Toby Negrin (he/his)
> Chief Product Officer
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith
> ___
> 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/AW62GVBP225B5WFBSWUUZSA4KWWGT543/
> 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/TUS7VNUAX4TAGUXQIWDXBQAIDO2MTFUV/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: calculating autoconfirmed age and edit count

[Risker]

There's no evidence behind the majority of policies of any Wikimedia
project, so I don't think that's really an expectation.

As to enwiki, it appears that the 4-day threshold was in place well before
2008, but the 10-edit threshold was added in 2008:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed_Proposal/Poll

The related "bugzilla" (now phabricator) ticket is here:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T16191

It was pretty clearly the position of Brion, the lead developer at the
time, that even making the change from 0 to 10 edits would be essentially
inconsequential; however, he did make that change.  (Most of that ticket is
an argument that the Enwiki community wanted a 7 day/20 edit threshold, and
complaining that it wasn't applied.)  My sense is that adding the edit
requirements actually did make a difference, although not really because it
resulted in vandalism/trolling accounts being left unused.  It made them
easier to spot.  I believe they also reduced the move vandalism that we
were experiencing at a ridiculous rate at the time.

I'm sure you'd be able to find similar discussions at other projects; I
just remember this one because I participated in it.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 4 Oct 2021 at 06:19, Amir E. Aharoni 
wrote:

> I've been involved in this lengthy circular debate: What should be the
> autoconfirmed age and article count in the Hebrew Wikipedia? See
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T243076 if you curious about this
> particular one, but I'd love to ask a more global question:
>
> How were these numbers calculated originally?
>
> For the account age, the default is four days, or five or seven days for a
> few wikis.
>
> For the edit count, the default is zero, but several wikis have 5, 10, 25,
> or 50.
>
> (See
> https://noc.wikimedia.org/conf/highlight.php?file=InitialiseSettings.php
> and search for "wgAutoConfirmAge" and "wgAutoConfirmCount".)
>
> Some wikis have groups, usually called "extended confirmed", and with
> higher counts; for example, 500 edits in English and some other languages
> (search for wmgAutopromoteOnceonEdit on the same page).
>
> So, how did the people arrive at these numbers? Why is it four days by
> default? Is it all just intuition and guesses, or was there any research
> behind it?
>
> Is it *good* that four days is the default for everyone, until someone
> bothers to update it (most wikis don't)? Or is it just a coincidence that
> was defined for a certain wiki and applied elsewhere? And when it's
> updated, why is it updated to one number and not some other?
>
> While I am an ardent supporter of the "anyone can edit" principle, it
> makes general sense to have some restrictions based on edit count, account
> age, and perhaps other parameters. But HOW are they calculated? Would it
> make sense to anyone to start making some calculations around it and
> optimize the number for wikis of different sizes?
>
> I'd imagine that there could be a calculation that says "in a given wiki,
> the chance of being reverted or blocked goes down after X days and X
> edits", and this number is probably different for every wiki (maybe there
> already is such a calculation somewhere). This could possibly be a starting
> point for a good calculation of a threshold; it wouldn't be perfect,
> because in some wikis it can perpetuate community practices which may be
> biased against new editors, but at least it's based on data and not on
> guesses.
>
> In the English Wikipedia 2016 discussion[1] about adding the "extended
> confirmed" group, I found one comment, by User:Opabinia regalis, which
> corresponds to my thinking on the topic: "The thresholds being used for
> these restrictions are essentially arbitrary, and we don't have a strong
> evidence base yet that they are well-chosen."
>
> Perhaps after twenty years we could start actually calculating these
> thresholds, and not just come up with arbitrary numbers? Or is there really
> no demand for smart and research-based decisions about these thresholds?
>
> [1]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_129#New_usergroup_with_autopromotion_to_implement_arbitration_%2230-500%22_bans_as_a_page_protection
>
> --
> Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
> http://aharoni.wordpress.com
> ‪“We're living in pieces,
> I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore‬
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list -- 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/ONYNFNACK34

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Encyclopedic Coverage of American Elections

[Risker]

There are already wikiprojects on English Wikipedia that work on
elections.[1][2]  I suggest you might want to continue this conversation
there, with people who have a strong interest in US elections, and a good
grasp on what is and is not likely to make a successful article. As noted
before, this is an international mailing list, and there are better places
to talk about American politics.

Oh...incidentally. That photo had no impact at all. The election was
yesterday, and the results were pretty much as predicted at least a week
ago; there were no surprises.

Risker/Anne





[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Directory/History_and_society#Politics_and_government
[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_presidential_elections

On Tue, 21 Sept 2021 at 01:45, Adam Sobieski 
wrote:

> Thank you.
>
>
>
> In the recent Canadian federal election [1], there was a last-minute
> happening [2] in the news and on social media [3] which seems difficult to
> precisely attribute to a responsible party. It appears that one or more
> photographs were leaked to a news organization which probably does not want
> to reveal their source. I am thinking about how best to include such
> complex events and happenings in encyclopedia articles about
> election-related strategies, tactics, events, and happenings.
>
>
>
> On the topic of US election-related encyclopedia articles, I think that it
> will be easier and that there will be more interested Wikimedians as the
> next election season approaches (2022) or, perhaps, as the next
> Presidential election season approaches (2024). Then, instead of exploring
> news archives, interested Wikimedians could add relevant events and
> happenings to encyclopedia articles as they occur.
>
>
>
> My current plan for improving Wikipedia’s overall election coverage
> includes participating, alongside interested others, in US 2024
> Presidential election-related encyclopedia articles so that the quality of
> these prominent encyclopedia articles might inspire the broader community
> with regard to covering subsequent elections. If anyone has a better plan,
> please let me know.
>
>
>
> If there is interest, perhaps we could organize a community project, a
> Wikiproject [4] or a Task Force [5], to think about and to discuss these
> topics – and, perhaps, to collaborate to build templates or prototypes of
> enhanced election coverage – en route to 2024.
>
>
>
> In the interim, I can see whether I can find enough content to create and
> structure articles about these topics pertaining to recent US Presidential
> elections (2016 and 2020).
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Canadian_federal_election
>
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_surprise
>
> [3]
> https://torontosun.com/news/election-2021/lilley-another-blackface-photo-embarrassing-to-trudeau-but-not-his-voters
>
>
>
> [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject
>
> [5]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Guide/Task_forces
>
>
>
> *From: *Eduardo Testart 
> *Sent: *Sunday, September 19, 2021 12:31 PM
> *To: *Wikimedia Mailing List 
> *Subject: *[Wikimedia-l] Re: Encyclopedic Coverage of American Elections
>
>
>
> Hi Adam,
>
>
>
> If this is a subject you care about, you are probably the right person to
> start writing those articles you would like to see.
>
>
>
> If you wait to see "how Wikimedians choose to create and structure them",
> you might very well never see the articles come to life.
>
>
>
> It's never too late to start editing 
>
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> El dom., 19 de sep. de 2021 09:55, Adam Sobieski 
> escribió:
>
> Thank you. It is interesting to consider how a more granular coverage of
> elections, coverage which includes notable mass media events, e.g., news
> stories and social media events, caused by and/or strategically reacted to
> by political campaigns, parties, and organizations, coverage which includes
> election tactics and strategies, can enhance Wikipedia and provide its
> readers with fuller pictures of elections.
>
>
>
> I am starting to think about possibilities with respect to these new
> articles. I am looking forward to seeing how Wikimedians choose to create
> and structure them. A hope is that future elections will improve as a
> result.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Adam
>
>
>
> *From: *Risker 
> *Sent: *Saturday, September 18, 2021 5:51 PM
> *To: *Wikimedia Mailing List 
> *Subject: *[Wikimedia-l] Re: Encyclopedic Coverage of American Elections
&g

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Encyclopedic Coverage of American Elections

[Risker]

Hello Adam -

This looks like a series of articles that could reasonably be made about
the elections of any country:  for example, "Election tactics in the 2000
US Presidential election" or "Election tactics in the 1986 British House of
Commons election" or whatever. Draft space is right there waiting for you
or others to create the articles.  I'm sure for many of these elections
there will be lots of available reference sources, both contemporaneous and
in terms of historical research.  It will be important to ensure that no
political bias is introduced into the articles.  Of course, there is also
the question of whether these tactics had any effect on the outcome of any
given election, and what that effect was; again, that will probably need
reference sources from independent academic researchers and books.

Incidentally, this is an international list; at least half of the people
who post here live and work in countries outside of the United States.  I
am uncomfortable to see Wikimedians referred to as "we, the American
people", and I hope that you will reconsider that kind of approach toward
any project.  Even English Wikipedia, which I assume is your target
audience here, is edited more by people outside the US than those inside
it.

Risker/Anne

On Sat, 18 Sept 2021 at 14:50, Adam Sobieski 
wrote:

> Wikimedia,
>
>
>
> I have a psephological and election historical observation that I would
> like to share with Wikimedia.
>
>
>
> Low-brow, crass, and manipulative political advertising and marketing,
> various hot-button, third-rail, dog-whistle, and wedge issues, have been
> deployed by candidates, campaigns, and political actors and organizations
> during American election seasons. These tactics are very much a part of our
> elections and appear to be subsequently omitted from encyclopedic (e.g.,
> Wikipedia) and historical coverage of the elections (e.g., 2000 – 2020).
>
>
>
> How low have election campaigns gone? Very. Yet, for some reasons,
> American encyclopedists and historians appear to be almost complicit,
> glossing over these problematic election campaign tactics. Each historical
> election appears to be reduced to a single encyclopedia article or small
> cluster of such articles, only some such articles attempt to list election
> issues, and no such article mentions campaign advertising and marketing
> themes and tactics deployed by campaigns, political actors, and
> organizations on radio, television, the Web, or social media.
>
>
>
> I propose that encyclopedists, scholars, and scientists seek to attend to,
> remember, and record election campaign mass media tactics and manipulations
> lest we, the American people, be doomed to repeat them in future elections.
> Perhaps by remembering the election campaign advertising and marketing
> tactics utilized, including on social media, and listing them
> encyclopedically, a buoyant pressure can be created with which to elevate
> our American politics.
>
>
>
> Thank you for your time and for considering these ideas with which to
> improve encyclopedic coverage of American elections.
>
>
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Adam Sobieski
>
>
> ___
> 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/MMHYBNWT6R6HO567QOIYEXBELL27YVK7/
> 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/ED5PPX7UMTAL6QW42RZP5VXULTW4BDHH/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Accessing wikipedia metadata

[Risker]

Mike's suggestion is good.  You would likely get better responses by asking
this question to the Wikimedia developers, so I am forwarding to that list.

Risker

On Thu, 16 Sept 2021 at 14:04, Gava, Cristina via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
>
>
> It is my first time interacting in this mailing list, so I will be happy
> to receive further feedbacks on how to better interact with the community :)
>
>
>
> I am trying to access Wikipedia meta data in a streaming and time/resource
> sustainable manner. By meta data I mean many of the voices that can be
> found in the statistics of a wiki article, such as edits, editors list,
> page views etc.
>
> I would like to do such for an online classifier type of structure:
> retrieve the data from a big number of wiki pages every tot time and use it
> as input for predictions.
>
>
>
> I tried to use the Wiki API, however it is time and resource expensive,
> both for me and Wikipedia.
>
>
>
> My preferred choice now would be to query the specific tables in the
> Wikipedia database, in the same way this is done through the Quarry tool.
> The problem with Quarry is that I would like to build a standalone script,
> without having to depend on a user interface like Quarry. Do you think that
> this is possible? I am still fairly new to all of this and I don’t know
> exactly which is the best direction.
>
> I saw [1] <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Data> that I could
> access wiki replicas both through Toolforge and PAWS, however I didn’t
> understand which one would serve me better, could I ask you for some
> feedback?
>
>
>
> Also, as far as I understood [2]
> <https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Analytics/Data_Lake>, directly
> accessing the DB through Hive is too technical for what I need, right?
> Especially because it seems that I would need an account with production
> shell access and I honestly don’t think that I would be granted access to
> it. Also, I am not interested in accessing sensible and private data.
>
>
>
> Last resource is parsing analytics dumps, however this seems less organic
> in the way of retrieving and polishing the data. As also, it would be
> strongly decentralised and physical-machine dependent, unless I upload the
> polished data online every time.
>
>
>
> Sorry for this long message, but I thought it was better to give you a
> clearer picture (hoping this is clear enough). If you could give me even
> some hint it would be highly appreciated.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
> Cristina
>
>
>
> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Data
>
> [2] https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Analytics/Data_Lake
> ___
> 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/6OZE7WIRDCMRA7TESD6XVCVB6ZQV4OFP/
> 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/6IQMN7H6P2DWRFA2OMSPAOUEBF3R472R/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming the new Wikimedia Foundation CEO

[Risker]

Welcome, Maryana.  We can all look forward to getting to know you better,
and for you to get to know us, too.

Feel free to reach out to people with your questions, your ideas, and your
concerns.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 14 Sept 2021 at 11:36, Maryana Iskander 
wrote:

> Dear All,
>
> Thank you for this opportunity to introduce myself to you.
>
> When I read the job position [1] for the next leader of Wikimedia
> Foundation, I noticed that it opened with a seemingly simple statement:
> “Knowledge belongs to all of us.” Does it, really? It’s a striking
> statement. In an increasingly unequal and polarizing world, one in which
> almost nothing belongs to all of us, the idea that knowledge *must *belong
> to all is enough to capture anyone’s attention and imagination – certainly
> mine.
>
> My story is shaped by a twin belief that knowledge can also set us free.
> Shortly after I was born in Cairo, Egypt, my parents left for the United
> States. During my time at university, graduate school, and law school, I
> was consistently pulled towards some of society’s toughest issues – women’s
> rights, civil rights, and the rights of prisoners. I was equally pulled by
> the need to be effective in making change – seeking out leadership
> positions and raising my hand and voice to change the institutions of
> power, not just protest against them. I learned that the opportunity to
> make meaningful impact often sits ‘in-between’ traditional spheres:
> in-between research and teaching at Rice University, in-between healthcare
> delivery and advocacy at Planned Parenthood, and in-between government and
> the private sector at Harambee Youth Employment Accelerator. My time at all
> of these organisations required listening to and learning from many diverse
> stakeholders – including volunteers – and using my position of leadership
> to champion often unheard voices.
>
>
>
> In 2012, I followed my heart to South Africa and its very complicated
> society – a legacy of apartheid perpetuating deep inequality despite the
> resilience of communities full of potential and hope, and a country with
> one of the highest youth unemployment rates in the world. A new
> organisation had just been formed with a big vision to close this
> opportunity gap. I signed up, first as an unpaid volunteer, and then for
> many years as the CEO. My job has been to cultivate a common space of trust
> for the collective assets of the society – from government, the private
> sector, civil society, and millions of young people – to work in a
> coalition to tackle one of the most daunting challenges of our time. To do
> this, we relied on an inclusive, multi-channel platform that leverages all
> forms of technology as a way to serve communities still riddled by a basic
> lack of access. Our successes came from the power of connection,
> partnership, and a collective belief that young people are the solution,
> not the problem. As I began my tenth year, I felt it was time to make space
> for new leaders.
>
>
>
> Why am I joining the Wikimedia Foundation at this moment? There are many
> reasons: (1) this collective of projects is growing what is perhaps the
> most important commons infrastructure of our modern world. I am excited to
> add my time and talents to this vision. What will it take to create – not
> just imagine – a world in which every single human being can freely share
> in the sum of all knowledge? (2) I have experienced first-hand that
> distributed leadership models can usually achieve more than any group of
> people can do on their own. I am eager to support processes that will make
> this even more true for our movement; and (3) I am drawn to working with
> people of integrity and commitment, who also appreciate humor and joy. I
> can already see that I will meet new colleagues like this from all over the
> world.
>
>
>
> My former colleagues will say that I believe progress is enabled by
> culture: one that is founded on accountability, diversity and inclusion in
> all its forms, and a way of working led by values. It has informed an
> organisational humility in working with others and a relentless focus on
> getting things done the right way – while doing the right thing.
>
>
>
> During the recruitment process, I met with a leading academic in the
> United States named Rebecca. She told me a story of her primary school
> teacher asking the students to raise their hands if they did not have an
> encyclopedia at home. She was one of those students, and it made her feel,
> for the first time, that maybe she didn’t have equal access to the
> resources needed for her education.  The work of this collective community,
> should we achieve our vision, will make it unnecessary for a teacher to
> ever ask tha

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Results for the most contended Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election

[Risker]

Thank you to the team who did so much work to make this election happen.  I
think it was really important to trial the STV system with a large
community participation to see whether it would yield a more diverse
outcome.

I too am disappointed (but not surprised) that STV had almost no effect at
all on the outcome of this election: only one of the top 5 candidates was a
non-European/non-North American from the very beginning, no non-Westerners
were selected, and the ranking of candidates was largely unchanged
throughout all of the steps - the top 5 candidates were always the top 5
candidates.

I will look forward to more details of the voting populace.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 7 Sept 2021 at 14:17, Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Hello,
> Thanks for the announcement. I was expecting/hopeful to see a little more
> diverse result (continent/region etc,)
> Anyway, thanks to the organising team for your work.
> My good wishes to all the newly selected board members of Wikimedia
> Foundation. Congratulations!!
>
> ইতি,
> টিটো দত্ত
> (মাতৃভাষা থাক জীবন জুড়ে)
>
>
> মঙ্গল, ৭ সেপ্টেম্বর, ২০২১ তারিখে ১১:৪১ PM টায় তারিখে Jackie Koerner <
> jkoerner-...@wikimedia.org> লিখেছেন:
>
>> *Translations can be found on
>> Meta: 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/2021-09-07/2021_Election_Results
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/2021-09-07/2021_Election_Results>*
>> Thank you to everyone who participated in the 2021 Board election. The
>> Elections Committee has reviewed the votes of the 2021 Wikimedia Foundation
>> Board of Trustees election, organized to select four new trustees. A record
>> 6,873 people from across 214 projects cast their valid votes. The following
>> four candidates received the most support:
>>
>>
>>
>>1.
>>
>>Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight
>>2.
>>
>>Victoria Doronina
>>3.
>>
>>Dariusz Jemielniak
>>4.
>>
>>Lorenzo Losa
>>
>>
>> Waiting for the Board’s appointment
>>
>> While these candidates have been ranked through the community vote, they
>> are not yet appointed to the Board of Trustees. They still need to pass a
>> successful background check and meet the qualifications outlined in the
>> Bylaws. This process can be longer depending on the country of residence of
>> the candidates. The Board has set a tentative date to appoint new trustees
>> at the end of this month. The Board also has approved
>> <https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/thread/37IV7FRWIKM4YAK2WBTUTPJA7LKGOATI/#37IV7FRWIKM4YAK2WBTUTPJA7LKGOATI>
>> a short extension to the terms of the exiting trustees to allow a smooth
>> transition.
>>
>> Thanks to all the candidates
>> Thanks to all candidates for their participation. They achieved a record
>> in the number of candidates and regional diversity, with more than half of
>> the 19 candidates from regions outside North America and Western Europe.
>> This election used Single Transferable Voting
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/Single_Transferable_Vote>
>> for the first time. This system does not indicate a number of votes or
>> percentage of support. Rather, it shows in which round each candidate was
>> eliminated. You can review the full results on Meta-Wiki
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Results>,
>> which document the order in which the candidates were mathematically
>> eliminated.
>>
>> Thanks to all the election volunteers
>>
>> The Board of Trustees stressed
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/2021-04-15_Resolution_about_the_upcoming_Board_elections>
>> the importance of increasing diversity on the Board. Dozens of volunteers
>> supported by a team of multilingual facilitators promoted the election in
>> up to 61 languages. They hosted many conversations about the Board election
>> in more than 50 languages and encouraged community members to participate
>> in all areas of the election.
>>
>> Statistics
>>
>> The 2021 Board of Trustees election broke new ground in several areas.
>> The Movement Strategy and Governance team will publish a report with the
>> most remarkable metrics soon. In the meantime, some statistics
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2021/Stats>
>> can be found on Meta-Wiki. Here you have some highlights.
>>
>>
>>-
>>
>>Participation increased by 1,7

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Join us at COSCUP 2021 - Conference for Open Source Coders, Users and Promoters

[Risker]

Just a note that the Wikimedia sessions are in fact on JULY 31, not July
1.

Good luck with these presentations, it looks very interesting.

Risker

On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 at 23:08, Joyce Chen  wrote:

> Hello Wikimedians,
>
> Just one day before the 2021 Conference for Open Source Coders, Users and
> Promoters(COSCUP) <https://coscup.org/2021/en/> ! [1]* (7/31-8/1 (UTC+8))*.
> This year, the event is completely live on YouTube
> <https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqfib4St70XPwnlDHUJerK5c7SQKsgWhS>
> [2] , open to a wider audience on the internet. (The conference is mostly
> in Chinese)
>
> We are thrilled to announce that the Wikimedians in Taiwan hold two
> sections <https://coscup.org/2021/en/session>[3] at the COSCUP, and we
> will share the Wikimedia movement of Taiwan in the past years, and present
> in several local languages(Taiwanese, Hakka and Aboriginal). Wikidata is
> also one of the focus.
>
> COSCUP is an annual conference held by Taiwanese Open source community
> participants since 2006. It’s a major force of Free software movement
> advocacy in Taiwan. COSCUP’s aim is providing a platform to connect Open
> Source coders, users, and promoters, and promote FLOSS with the annual
> conference.
>
>
> Wikimedia sessions are on July 1st, 2021, Room TR411 and TR412-2, followed
> by below topics...
>
>- TR411 (10am-04pm) Live: https://youtu.be/KpC3IK6gx5c
>   - From Wikipedia consciousness to the crisis consciousness of Payuan
>   - The hope of bilingual Sakizaya
>   - Let the language faraway be transformed into the project close to
>   life
>   - Pleased to see the reborn of Seediq language
>   - View of Bân-lâm-gú Wikipedia from a Taiwanese Hokkien speaker
>   - My Way to Write Wikipedia in Taiwanese
>   - ...and more
>
>   - TR412-2 (10am-03:40pm)  Live: https://youtu.be/Sr3pTulB_9M
>- Wikidata Basic Editing Teaching
>   - Using open data on Wikidata to develop the website
>   - Developing web maps with ProtomapsJS
>   - Zelfvacc: a Self-financed vaccine map based on OSM & Wikidata
>   - ...and more
>
>
> Do not hesitate to join us !
>
> [1] https://coscup.org/2021/en/
> [2]
> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLqfib4St70XPwnlDHUJerK5c7SQKsgWhS
> [3] https://coscup.org/2021/en/session
>
> --
> *陳禹先 **Yuhsien Chen, Joyce ** (she/her/hers)*
> *User : growtw*
>
> *社團法人台灣維基媒體協會  Wikimedia Taiwan*
> Email: yuhsien.c...@wikimedia.tw 
>
> ___
> 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/RGLTQC3QN7OKOEHKC4UOSR34WEUNCGZS/
> 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/DAX4P7ED4OMYTKE6FGEECEYMACI27HL5/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Foundation org chart

[Risker]

Ah, I think it becomes clearer now.  This is your preferred version, not
anything official, based on your interpretations.

Please show me, in amongst all the official documents released in relation
to the strategy, where it recommends that WMF employees should have
representation on the WMF Board of Trustees.  Not as a suggestion from
someone, but something that has officially been agreed upon. I am sure I
don't need to remind you that the WMF is an American foundation and that it
is not required to meet the expectations of legislators in other countries.
I think the broad WIkimedia community would be up in arms at the thought
that a small group of about 500 people would have such proportionately high
representation compared to the broader community (through either
affiliate-selected or participant-selected seats).

And, having read your "revised" versionno, just no.  Projects don't
belong there.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 22:24, Bill Takatoshi  wrote:

> Hi Anne,
>
> Thank you for both of your excellent questions.
>
> 1) In Germany, rank-and-file employees are required to be represented
> in seat(s) on corporate boards of directors. Employee satisfaction is
> off the scale compared to North America, as are advantages such as
> healthcare untethered from employers, maternity and paternity leave,
> substantially longer life expectancy, and reduced income inequality.
>
> 2) The projects were abstracted out of the org chart. Individually,
> they exist in the "Editor" and "Operations" nodes. All of the
> Wikimedia projects have editors, who use the services provided by the
> Engineering Operations team.
>
> I hope there is some way to get comment on the proposed org chart on
> the list of proposed Board candidate questions without disclosing my
> userid.
>
> -Will
>
> On Mon, Jul 5, 2021 at 6:58 PM Risker  wrote:
> >
> > Two questions, Bill.
> >
> > 1) Labour representation?  Huh?
> > 2) Where are the actual Wikimedia projects?  I meanall of this is
> hubris if the projects aren't on the org chart. They're the raison d'etre
> of every aspect of the community.
> >
> > Risker/Anne
> >
> > On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 19:03, Bill Takatoshi 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Earlier today I tried to predict what the WMF org chart will look
> >> like, but I wasn't confident about my suggestion, so I created a new
> >> email account, subscribed it to wikimedia-l, and tried to send from
> >> there. I learned that new subscribers are moderated, which seems
> >> sensible given the level of trolling and disruption, and have since
> >> improved the prediction and become more confident about it. I have
> >> since learned that HTML email with embedded email attachments aren't
> >> allowed either, so, Moderators, please reject my earlier anonymous
> >> submission(s).
> >>
> >> This is what I predict the Wikimedia organizational chart will look
> >> like in one year's time:
> >>
> >>  https://i.ibb.co/HPzpqLt/WMF-orgchart.png
> >>
> >> Please critique it! If you are running for the Board of Directors, I
> >> am especially interested in your critique of this prediction.
> >>
> >> Thank you!
> >>
> >> -Will
> >> ___
> >> 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/DURUHZ3WN7QBQSXWLUVU7ZRLDWHV42X2/
> >> 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/P4A57AOWXRWM7YMFWCOSAD2C2ZE6ZO4W/
> > 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/4ZU6FR7JSMNBJ4RZUHUBHAJ4XBJNTREV/
> 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/7DVPFBQI56OS7XZNO7X3WJOGPOHQSDGL/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Foundation org chart

[Risker]

Two questions, Bill.

1) Labour representation?  Huh?
2) Where are the actual Wikimedia projects?  I meanall of this is
hubris if the projects aren't on the org chart. They're the raison d'etre
of every aspect of the community.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 19:03, Bill Takatoshi  wrote:

> Earlier today I tried to predict what the WMF org chart will look
> like, but I wasn't confident about my suggestion, so I created a new
> email account, subscribed it to wikimedia-l, and tried to send from
> there. I learned that new subscribers are moderated, which seems
> sensible given the level of trolling and disruption, and have since
> improved the prediction and become more confident about it. I have
> since learned that HTML email with embedded email attachments aren't
> allowed either, so, Moderators, please reject my earlier anonymous
> submission(s).
>
> This is what I predict the Wikimedia organizational chart will look
> like in one year's time:
>
>  https://i.ibb.co/HPzpqLt/WMF-orgchart.png
>
> Please critique it! If you are running for the Board of Directors, I
> am especially interested in your critique of this prediction.
>
> Thank you!
>
> -Will
> ___
> 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/DURUHZ3WN7QBQSXWLUVU7ZRLDWHV42X2/
> 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/P4A57AOWXRWM7YMFWCOSAD2C2ZE6ZO4W/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Appropriate promotion OR Appropriate canvassing protocol/policy

[Risker]

Speaking personally only, I'd prefer not to have candidate statements or
self-promotion on this mailing list, although I'd be fine if candidates
announced their candidacy and gave a link to their statements on Meta.  We
have to keep in mind that the majority of potential voters do not read this
mailing list, and it's worthwhile for both the voters and the candidates to
ensure that all members of the community have an equal opportunity to
assess each candidate fairly and fully.

Ultimately, this is a decision for the list moderators; however, it's also
a decision of the readers whether or not to read these statements.

Risker/Anne

On Fri, 25 Jun 2021 at 15:06, Benjamin Lees  wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 25, 2021 at 3:05 AM টিটো দত্ত Tito Dutta 
> wrote:
>
>> In such a situation there is a possibility that if a candidate has many
>> social media or contacts and friends (Wimimedian), they will end up getting
>> more votes than someone who entirely relied on their nomination and
>> performance.
>>
>
> Is this a problem?  That's normally how an election works.  You
> participate in public debates, Q, or other events to present yourself to
> voters who have come to look at all the candidates, and then you reach out
> and try to engage voters who haven't engaged themselves.
>
> WP:CANVASS exists in the Wikipedia milieu that proclaims that discussions
> are not votes, and hence discourages ordinary election behaviors in order
> to promote consensus-based decision-making. (I don't recall offhand whether
> or how WP:CANVASS has been applied to the one thing that even the English
> Wikipedia acknowledges is an election: the ArbCom election.)
>
> Nevertheless, I think it would be appropriate for particular venues to
> consider whether they want to permit themselves to be used for
> campaigning.  For instance, a couple people announced their candidacies or
> intended candidacies for things on this mailing list earlier this month,
> which is fine, I think, but you could imagine it becoming disruptive to the
> list if it devolved into electioneering by a hundred different candidates.
> Likewise, the English Wikipedia might not permit a candidate to post a
> vote-for-me message on the talk pages of all eligible voters.  That's
> really a question of disruptiveness to the forum, though, not fairness of
> the election.
>
> Benjamin
> ___
> 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/PKRNPMQS6DPULWRI74FXX3KDGX3JEM57/
> 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/L5GHKVH3HBPX4BXMFFIR627CIWYYLFF5/
To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Welcoming María Sefidari as a Foundation consultant. :)

[Risker]

There's a big leap between the "advisory" role that Maria mentioned in her
notice of resignation and a full-on consultancy.  In that email, dated one
day after the June Board of Trustees meeting chaired by Maria, she told us
that the WMF had already approached her to take on the "advisory" role;
this email was sent to the community *before* Maria's resignation had taken
effect.  Maria is not specific on who approached her to take on the
advisory role before her resignation took effect, but clearly somebody did,
or she would not have mentioned it in her farewell email.

I am very sad about all of this. It taints the entire governance process.
It is precisely the type of issue that grants committees at all levels have
been asked to "address" in their comments and recommendations; I know for a
fact that governance and leadership issues like this had a very significant
impact on grants recommendations for multiple grantee organizations in the
past, usually with the urging of WMF staff and leadership.

It also does nothing to reassure the community about the strategy process,
especially at a time when the absence of a community-selected board member
would have been particularly useful.  Instead, we now have a paid
consultant for a position that (as best I can tell) was never advertised,
posted, or even head-hunted.

And I'm sad for Maria, who has made many contributions to the movement, and
who is now in a situation where whatever work she was contracted to do is
going to be made so much more difficult because of this.

Just because something is legal and does not actively violate the bylaws,
doesn't make it the right thing to do.  The message that's being sent here
isn't helpful to the movement.  It puts others who are trying to carry the
movement message out to new and existing communities into a really
difficult position.

Risker/Anne


On Thu, 24 Jun 2021 at 00:51,  wrote:

> Hello, All,
> I’m Amanda Keton, the General Counsel of the Foundation, and I’d like to
> clarify some of the questions and comments that have been raised over the
> engagement of María as a Foundation consultant. I want to assure you that
> we carefully followed our policies, compensated this in line with similar
> consultants, and legitimately assessed her as the best person for the role.
> The need. Maria’s engagement comes at a time of transition for both the
> Board and the Foundation executive staff. This is also a time where the
> Community Resilience & Sustainability (CR) unit is setting up mechanisms
> to ensure that the Foundation provides seamless service to our growing
> community in its areas of responsibility. As many of you know, that team
> has taken on Movement Strategy due to the transition along with maintaining
> their support of Board elections, the Universal Code of Conduct, and
> leading our cross-departmental approach to supporting a Thriving Movement.
> As a unit, CR undertook a needs assessment of the workload ahead. This
> needs assessment revealed gaps in implementation of the Foundation’s
> Movement Strategy and in supporting staff with the ongoing Board selection
> process, upcoming onboarding, and supporting a smooth transition. The team
> currently supporting the Board expansion is quite stretched, monitoring
> multiple channels in many languages. Having another person who can step in
> immediately is tremendously helpful to these efforts. Based on this, CR
> considered the necessary skills and expertise for assistance in executing
> this work. While seeking this expertise, numerous factors were considered.
> Some of these factors included experience with the Board, volunteers and
> management. We also considered the qualifications with respect to the
> criteria and role at hand. The unique blend of circumstances at play and
> the importance of moving forward strongly at this time led us to carefully
> assess our needs and explore creative solutions.
> The role. In developing the scope of work for this role, we determined
> that María was a very strong candidate to support this critical work. With
> the transition at the executive level, and at the Board level, Maria brings
> long-term familiarity with the strategy process and strategy conversations
> that is crucial for the Foundation and the movement. Furthermore, she has
> been a big believer and a promoter of the Movement Strategy. We believe she
> can help ensure continuity in that work and can also support Maggie and
> others in the Foundation working to help expand the Board in service of
> bringing additional expertise, representation and capacity.
> Managing a potential conflict of interest. Maria first considered stepping
> down months ago, but she wanted to help navigate the transition at the helm
> of the Board. I followed our Conflict of Interest policy and brought this
> staff id

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Announcing an academic conference on Wikipedia translation

[Risker]

While I understand that this could be a concern if it was a large fee, it
works out to about $13 USD/11 Euros for observer status, and double that
for presenter status.  This does not sound outrageous; it pays for the
equipment, software, staffing, technical support, and bandwidth, as well as
the maintenance and storage of presentation materials.  Even online
conferences have some costs, and those costs are often not being absorbed
by sponsors to the extent that they have been in the past.

It may be worthwhile for the WMF to agree to take a certain number of slots
and pay for them, and then allot them to people with a significant history
of translation on our projects on a first come/first served basis;
honestly, they could support the registration fees for 25 editors for less
than 500 USD.  That's a bargain, especially if they want to shift the focus
to translation into smaller projects.

I hope that the conference goes well.

Risker/Anne

On Thu, 27 May 2021 at 03:42, Željko Blaće  wrote:

> Also interested in contributing, but registration fee is something that
> puts me off when approaching academic conferences, especially now when
> online so much of the cost is reduced.
>
> Best - Z. Blace
>
>
> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 9:22 AM Natacha Rault via Wikimedia-l <
> wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi Mark,
>>
>> This is really interesting. I take care of les sans pagEs community on
>> fr-wikii and we translate a lot from English, a little from Spanish and
>> Italian. I would keen to participate, thanks for sharing!
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>> Nattes à chat
>>
>>
>> Le 27 mai 2021 à 07:47, Mark SHUTTLEWORTH  a écrit
>> :
>>
>> Dear friends and colleagues
>>
>> Further to my message at the end of last month and the queries that one
>> or two of you made, I'd like to notify you of the following:
>>
>> 1. the conference will now be 100% online
>> 2. the deadline for submission of proposals has been extended to 30th
>> June 2021
>>
>> Full updated details and Call for Papers can be found on the conference
>> website at https://ctn.hkbu.edu.hk/wikiconf2021/.
>>
>> Best regards
>>
>> Mark Shuttleworth
>>
>> On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 at 12:13, Mark SHUTTLEWORTH 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear friends and colleagues
>>>
>>> Please permit me to publicise an academic conference that we're holding
>>> at Hong Kong Baptist University on 15-17 December 2021.
>>>
>>> The conference will be an ideal forum in which to discuss research
>>> methodologies, issues of collaborativity, theoretical frameworks that have
>>> proven valuable for the study of Wikipedia translation, the use of
>>> Wikipedia in the translation classroom and by translation professionals,
>>> and the nature of Wikipedia translation and how it differs not only from
>>> other more traditional types of translation but also from other newly
>>> emerging types. While the conference's main focus is interlingual
>>> translation within the online encyclopaedia, we are also interested
>>> in research into the multilingual Wikipedia that makes no explicit
>>> reference to translation issues.
>>>
>>> The conference will be online, face-to-face or mixed mode, depending on
>>> prevailing circumstances. Please see the conference website at
>>> https://ctn.hkbu.edu.hk/wikiconf2021/ for full details and the Call for
>>> Papers.
>>>
>>> I hope to see some of you there!
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> Professor Mark Shuttleworth 夏致遠
>>> Department of Translation, Interpreting and Intercultural Studies
>>> Hong Kong Baptist University
>>> Phone: +852 3411 6641
>>> http://www.tran.hkbu.edu.hk
>>> https://ctn.hkbu.edu.hk/wikiconf2021/
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Disclaimer
>>
>> This message (including any attachments) may contain confidential
>> information intended for a specific individual and/or purpose. If you are
>> not the intended recipient, please delete this message and notify the
>> sender and the University immediately. Any disclosure, copying, or
>> distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, is
>> prohibited as it may be unlawful.
>>
>> In addition, the University specifically denies any responsibility for
>> the accuracy or quality of information obtained through University E-mail
>> Facilities. Any views and opinions expressed in the email(s) are those of
>> the author(s), and do not necessarily represent the views and

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Join the new Regional Committees for Grants

[Risker]

Thank you for doing that, Tanveer and the rest of the team.  I was just
thinking that it would be good to centralize the discussion.

Risker/Anne

On Fri, 21 May 2021 at 13:12, Tanveer Hasan 
wrote:

> Hi Florence,
>
> I wanted to bring to your attention that the CR team has responded to your
> questions on the discussion page of the Community Resources/Grants
> Strategy Relaunch 2020-2021
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Resources/Grants_Strategy_Relaunch_2020-2021>.
> We are doing this (responding on discussion page) because of the importance
> of the questions that you have raised and hope that the questions and
> responses would be of help to other community members as well. We request
> community members to post their questions directly on the discussion page.
>
> Regards,
>
> P.S: CR team is going to be copy pasting all the questions raised here on
> the mailing list on the discussion page of the Grants Strategy Relaunch for
> the sake of continuity and having the option to translate questions and
> responses in multiple languages for the benefit of other community members.
> Please allow us a little time to respond to the questions that have
> already been raised in this email thread.
>
> ಶುಕ್ರ, ಮೇ 21, 2021 ರಂದು 06:03 ಅಪರಾಹ್ನ ಸಮಯಕ್ಕೆ ರಂದು Florence Devouard <
> fdevou...@gmail.com> ಅವರು ಬರೆದಿದ್ದಾರೆ:
>
>> Hello Julia
>>
>>
>> I apology if I missed a step at some point.
>> In this application, I read that
>>
>> "All the current grant committees (both active and inactive) will cease
>> to function with the implementation of the new grants strategy of the
>> Community Resources Team effective from 1 July 2021. We strongly encourage
>> current and former committee members to apply to be part of the regional
>> committees."
>>
>> So... is it to understand that absolutely ALL grants provided by the
>> Wikimedia Foundation will go through those yet uncreated committees ?
>>
>> Does that mean all current recipients of APG grants will have to address
>> their annual request to those yet unknown teams in the future ? (september
>> in some cases)
>>
>> To whom will grants requests have to be addressed to for those groups who
>> are not related to a specific region ? Do they have to pick up a region of
>> their choice and consider themselves attached to it, or will they be
>> appointed a region by default ?
>>
>> Sorry if the questions seem to be unrelated to your call but...
>> 1) I am trying to understand and measure how much unstable our current
>> situation is as grantees so that we can anticipate...
>> 2) I am trying to evaluate the responsibilities that will be on the
>> shoulders of those new regional committee members
>>
>>
>> Best
>>
>>
>> Florence
>>
>>
>> Le 21/05/2021 à 08:06, Julia Brungs a écrit :
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> We hope this email finds you well and safe. The COVID 19 situation
>> continues to affect many of us across the globe and our thoughts are with
>> everyone affected. We are also aware that there are several processes
>> currently in progress that demand volunteer time and we do not want to add
>> more work to anyone's plate.
>>
>> We do want to draw your attention to our new Regional Committees for
>> Grants though as they are an opportunity for you to have an active say in
>> the future of our Movement!
>>
>>  So today, we invite you to join our new Regional Committees for
>> Grants! 
>>
>> We encourage Wikimedians and Free Knowledge advocates to be part of the
>> new Regional Committees that the WMF Community Resources team is setting up
>> as part of the grants strategy relaunch [1]. You will be a key strategic
>> thought partner to help understand the complexities of any region, provide
>> knowledge and expertise to applicants, to support successful movement
>> activities, and make funding decisions for grant applications in the region.
>>
>> Find out more on meta [2].
>>
>> Regional Committees will be established for the following regions:
>>
>>- Middle East and Africa
>>- SAARC [3] region (Includes Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India,
>>the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka)
>>- East, Southeast Asia, and Pacific (ESEAP) region
>>- Latin America (LATAM) and The Caribbean
>>- United States and Canada
>>- Northern and Western Europe
>>- Central and Eastern Europe (CEE)
>>
>> All details about the Committees and how to apply can be found on meta
>> [4]. Applications have to be sub

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Join the new Regional Committees for Grants

[Risker]

I am very concerned that you think you're going to get about 80 qualified
and committed volunteers to do this work within the next few weeks.  This
is unrealistic. I also agree with Florence's concerns.

Risker/Anne

On Fri, 21 May 2021 at 08:33, Florence Devouard  wrote:

> Hello Julia
>
>
> I apology if I missed a step at some point.
> In this application, I read that
>
> "All the current grant committees (both active and inactive) will cease to
> function with the implementation of the new grants strategy of the
> Community Resources Team effective from 1 July 2021. We strongly encourage
> current and former committee members to apply to be part of the regional
> committees."
>
> So... is it to understand that absolutely ALL grants provided by the
> Wikimedia Foundation will go through those yet uncreated committees ?
>
> Does that mean all current recipients of APG grants will have to address
> their annual request to those yet unknown teams in the future ? (september
> in some cases)
>
> To whom will grants requests have to be addressed to for those groups who
> are not related to a specific region ? Do they have to pick up a region of
> their choice and consider themselves attached to it, or will they be
> appointed a region by default ?
>
> Sorry if the questions seem to be unrelated to your call but...
> 1) I am trying to understand and measure how much unstable our current
> situation is as grantees so that we can anticipate...
> 2) I am trying to evaluate the responsibilities that will be on the
> shoulders of those new regional committee members
>
>
> Best
>
>
> Florence
>
>
> Le 21/05/2021 à 08:06, Julia Brungs a écrit :
>
> Dear all,
>
> We hope this email finds you well and safe. The COVID 19 situation
> continues to affect many of us across the globe and our thoughts are with
> everyone affected. We are also aware that there are several processes
> currently in progress that demand volunteer time and we do not want to add
> more work to anyone's plate.
>
> We do want to draw your attention to our new Regional Committees for
> Grants though as they are an opportunity for you to have an active say in
> the future of our Movement!
>
>  So today, we invite you to join our new Regional Committees for Grants!
> 
>
> We encourage Wikimedians and Free Knowledge advocates to be part of the
> new Regional Committees that the WMF Community Resources team is setting up
> as part of the grants strategy relaunch [1]. You will be a key strategic
> thought partner to help understand the complexities of any region, provide
> knowledge and expertise to applicants, to support successful movement
> activities, and make funding decisions for grant applications in the region.
>
> Find out more on meta [2].
>
> Regional Committees will be established for the following regions:
>
>- Middle East and Africa
>- SAARC [3] region (Includes Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, India,
>the Maldives, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka)
>- East, Southeast Asia, and Pacific (ESEAP) region
>- Latin America (LATAM) and The Caribbean
>- United States and Canada
>- Northern and Western Europe
>- Central and Eastern Europe (CEE)
>
> All details about the Committees and how to apply can be found on meta
> [4]. Applications have to be submitted by *June 4, 2021*!
>
> If you have any questions or comments, please use the meta discussion page
> [5].
>
> Please do share this announcement widely with your Network.
> Best wishes,
> Julia on behalf of the Community Resources Team
>
> [1]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Resources/Grants_Strategy_Relaunch_2020-2021
> [2]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Resources/Grants_Strategy_Relaunch_2020-2021/Regional_Committees
> [3] https://www.saarc-sec.org/index.php/about-saarc/about-saarc
> [4]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Resources/Grants_Strategy_Relaunch_2020-2021/Regional_Committees#How_to_apply
> [5]
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Resources/Grants_Strategy_Relaunch_2020-2021
>
> --
> *Julia Brungs*
> Senior Community Relations Specialist
> Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.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
> 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

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Affiliations Committee Call for Candidates - June 2021

[Risker]

Thanks, Jeffrey; it's a start.  Perhaps asking specific questions will be
more helpful.

Which subcommittee is responsible for:

   -  establishing standards for new affiliates (differentiated by type)
   and existing affiliates?  Are they the same group, or is this
   responsibility split?
   - collecting  and reviewing information to verify that the affiliates
   are meeting their standards?
   - supporting and encouraging existing affiliates to meet those standards?
   - assisting in the ongoing development of affiliates
   - determining whether an affiliate has fallen so far below standard that
   it can no longer continue?
   - revoking the approval of an affiliate (or recommending revocation - in
   which case, to whom does it make the recommendation?)
   - advocating within the movement on the value of the affiliate system

Does the Affiliates Committee continue to be a committee of the WMF Board
of Trustees?

Is it expected to have any role in recommendations about funding (or
denying/withdrawing funding) to new and existing affiliates, now that the
FDC has essentially been eliminated, either as a group or through one or
the other of its subcommittees?

What range of conflict resolution tools will be available to the conflict
subcommittee?

 These were the first questions that came to me when I first saw your
email.  I would not be surprised if others have more questions.

Risker/Anne

On Sun, 16 May 2021 at 15:03, Jeffrey Keefer  wrote:

> Risker-
>
> Thank you for question on this.
>
> The descriptions are being revised, but let me try to briefly summarize
> them so there is something to work with for now.
>
> The Recognitions Subcommittee is involved with helping new Affiliates
> (User Groups, Chapters, and Thematic Organizations) to form and be
> recognized groups within the Movement. This involves clarifying their scope
> and ensuring there is no confusion in overlap of intentions.
>
> The Conflicts Subcommittee helps Affiliates when conflicts arise within or
> between Affiliates, including attempts to resolve these issues or ideally
> prevent them if possible.
>
> I hope this is helpful, even in this shortened form.
>
> Thank you.
>
> -
>
> Jeffrey
> User:FULBERT
>
>
>
> On May 16, 2021, at 12:09 AM, Risker  wrote:
>
> Jeffrey, could you please link to a description of the roles and
> responsibilities of members of the two subcommittees?  You've mentioned the
> expected skillset for each, but have not explained what they are actually
> expected to be responsible for.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Risker/Anne
>
> On Sat, 15 May 2021 at 14:41, Jeffrey Keefer  wrote:
>
>> The *Affiliations Committee
>> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Affiliations_Committee>* 
>> –
>> the committee responsible for guiding volunteers in establishing Wikimedia
>> chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups – is looking for new
>> members!
>>
>> The main role of the AffCom is to guide groups of volunteers that are
>> interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new
>> groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia
>> affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance
>> with requirements and best practices, and update the Wikimedia Foundation
>> Board of Trustees as well as advise them on issues connected to chapters,
>> thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.
>>
>> The committee consists of five to fifteen members, selected at least once
>> every year, to serve two-year terms.
>>
>> Being a part of the AffCom requires communication with volunteers all
>> over the world, negotiating skills, cultural sensitivity, and the ability
>> to understand legal texts. We look for a mix of different skill sets in our
>> members.
>> *Responsibilities*
>>
>>- Availability of up to 5-8 hours per month
>>
>>
>>- Participate in monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings
>>
>>
>>- Commitment to carry out assigned tasks in a given time.
>>
>>
>>- Facilitate and support communications
>>
>>
>>- Affiliate Support and growth
>>
>> *Required and Recommended Abilities, Skills, Knowledge for Affiliations
>> Committee Members*
>>
>> Strong interpersonal relationship among members of the committee and also
>> with the Wikimedia community members. Across all committee members, there
>> are additional relevant skills as well as requirements which help to
>> support the committee and its sustainability which include both required
>> and relevant general skills
>> *Required*
>>
>>- Fluency

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Affiliations Committee Call for Candidates - June 2021

[Risker]

Jeffrey, could you please link to a description of the roles and
responsibilities of members of the two subcommittees?  You've mentioned the
expected skillset for each, but have not explained what they are actually
expected to be responsible for.

Thanks,

Risker/Anne

On Sat, 15 May 2021 at 14:41, Jeffrey Keefer  wrote:

> The *Affiliations Committee
> <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MyLanguage/Affiliations_Committee>* –
> the committee responsible for guiding volunteers in establishing Wikimedia
> chapters, thematic organizations, and user groups – is looking for new
> members!
>
> The main role of the AffCom is to guide groups of volunteers that are
> interested in forming Wikimedia affiliates. We review applications from new
> groups, answer questions and provide advice about the different Wikimedia
> affiliation models and processes, review affiliate bylaws for compliance
> with requirements and best practices, and update the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board of Trustees as well as advise them on issues connected to chapters,
> thematic organizations and Wikimedia user groups.
>
> The committee consists of five to fifteen members, selected at least once
> every year, to serve two-year terms.
>
> Being a part of the AffCom requires communication with volunteers all over
> the world, negotiating skills, cultural sensitivity, and the ability to
> understand legal texts. We look for a mix of different skill sets in our
> members.
> *Responsibilities*
>
>- Availability of up to 5-8 hours per month
>
>
>- Participate in monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings
>
>
>- Commitment to carry out assigned tasks in a given time.
>
>
>- Facilitate and support communications
>
>
>- Affiliate Support and growth
>
> *Required and Recommended Abilities, Skills, Knowledge for Affiliations
> Committee Members*
>
> Strong interpersonal relationship among members of the committee and also
> with the Wikimedia community members. Across all committee members, there
> are additional relevant skills as well as requirements which help to
> support the committee and its sustainability which include both required
> and relevant general skills
> *Required*
>
>- Fluency in English
>- Availability of up to 5 hours per week, and the time to participate
>in a monthly one and two-hour voice/video meetings.
>- Willingness to use one's real name in committee activities
>(including contacts with current and potential affiliates) when 
> appropriate.
>- Strong track record of effective collaboration
>- International orientation
>
> *Relevant for all members*
>
>- Public Communications (English writing and speaking skills)
>- Skills in other languages are a major plus.
>- Understanding of the structure and work of affiliates and the
>Wikimedia Foundation.
>- Documentation practices
>- Interviewing experience
>- Experience with, or in, an active affiliate is a major plus.
>- Teamwork: Project and people management skills to coordinate and
>collaborate with different parties on a shared plan and see it through to
>completion.
>- Problem-Solving: Ability to evaluate various solutions, consider
>multiple interests and points of view, revisit unresolved issues, seek
>compromise and work and communicate across languages and cultures.
>
> Given the expectations for maintaining the course in 2021 and preparing
> for potential 2021 transitions as part of the Movement Strategy
> implementation process, it is important that we are also clear about two
> different skill sets critical to committee support at this time. The first
> skillset is oriented to understanding affiliate dynamics and organizational
> development patterns to successfully process affiliate applications for
> recognition; the other is oriented to conflict prevention and intervention
> support for affiliates in conflict.
> *Relevant to Affiliate Recognitions*
>
>- Administration & Attention to detail
>- Readiness to participate in political discussions on the role and
>future of affiliates, models of affiliation, and similar topics.
>- Awareness of the affiliates ecosystem and models and understanding
>of community building, organizational development, and group dynamics
>
> *Relevant to Conflict Prevention & Intervention*
>
>- Communication skills for active listening, clear instruction and
>turn-taking.
>- Stress Management skills for maintaining patience and positivity
>- Emotional intelligence to maintain awareness of emotions of oneself
>and others to practice empathy, impartiality, and mutual respect.
>- Facilitation, negotiatio

[Wikimedia-l] Re: Wikimedia Deutschland’s new Executive Director: Christian Humborg

[Risker]

Congratulations to Wikimedia Deutschland and to Christian.  I wish them
much continued success.


Risker/Anne

On Mon, 10 May 2021 at 13:18, Mardetanha  wrote:

> Excellent to find out the newly elected ED is a Christian Humborg. I wish
> him success in his new role.
>
>
> Mardetanha
>
>
> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 3:13 PM টিটো দত্ত Tito Dutta 
> wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>> Good to know that. Thanks for informing about the progress. Good wishes
>> to Christian Humborg for his new role.
>> Regards.
>>
>>
>> সোম, ১০ মে, ২০২১ ৪:০৬ PM তারিখে Lukas Mezger 
>> লিখেছেন:
>>
>>> Dear fellow Wikimedians,
>>>
>>> In January, Abraham Taherivand informed you that he had decided not to
>>> renew his contract with Wikimedia Deutschland. Today, I am excited to
>>> announce that our search for a new Executive Director has been successful:
>>> Christian Humborg will take over office at Wikimedia Deutschland from 1
>>> June.
>>>
>>> One of the most important tasks of the Wikimedia Deutschland Executive
>>> Board is the appointment of the Executive Director. My colleagues and I are
>>> very pleased to have found such a fantastic candidate for the vacant
>>> position. Christian impressed us with his bold ideas and visions, his
>>> leadership experience at the head of influential civil society
>>> organisations and his passion for the liberation of knowledge. He clearly
>>> prevailed among the 59 applicants. The search was managed by our
>>> Supervisory Board and Abraham with the support of an external executive
>>> search firm.
>>>
>>> Christian knows the Wikimedia Movement and our commitment to free
>>> knowledge well – because he has helped shape both since 2016 as deputy
>>> executive director and head of finance at Wikimedia Deutschland. Before
>>> that, he was the executive director of the anti-corruption organisation
>>> Transparency International Germany, helped establish the non-profit
>>> investigative journalism centre Correctiv and was awarded the Grimme Online
>>> Award as a member of the journalism collective carta.info. He is the
>>> right fit for the future of Wikimedia Deutschland.
>>>
>>> At this point, on behalf of our entire Board, I would like to express my
>>> heartfelt thanks to Abraham, who has achieved so much as Executive Director
>>> over the last four years. He has set important strategic impulses that will
>>> be decisive for the future success of Wikimedia in the world. Abraham
>>> joined Wikimedia Deutschland in 2012 and has since strengthened the
>>> organisation in every respect and positioned it very well for this
>>> handover. Thank you for your great commitment!
>>>
>>> It is to Abraham’s credit that he discussed his decision with the Board
>>> at an early stage and thus made a well thought-out search process possible.
>>> Together, we are now working on a good transition.
>>>
>>> We are looking forward to continuing the success of the last four years
>>> together with Christian, to tackling new projects, to implementing the 2030
>>> strategy – and to liberating a few more pieces of knowledge together every
>>> day.
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Lukas
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Dr. Lukas Mezger
>>> Vorsitzender des Präsidiums / chair of the Supervisory Board
>>>
>>> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
>>> Tel. (030) 219 158 260 – (0151) 268 63 931
>>> http://wikimedia.de
>>>
>>> Bleiben Sie auf dem neuesten Stand! Aktuelle Nachrichten und spannende
>>> Geschichten rund um Wikimedia, Wikipedia und Freies Wissen im Newsletter: 
>>> Zur
>>> Anmeldung <https://www.wikimedia.de/newsletter/>.
>>>
>>> Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
>>> Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
>>> http://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 -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines
>>> at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines an

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Authorities in Myanmar blocks all languages of Wikipedia, says internet freedom watchdog = Qiuwen

[Risker]

Anecdotally, we on English Wikipedia have received multiple requests for IP
block exemption from residents of Myanmar, including requests for both
local and global IP

On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 at 19:56, Kunal Mehta  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 2/19/21 1:08 PM, 《求闻》编译组／Qiuwen WMCug wrote:
> > Netblocks provided additional information in a picture attached to the
> tweet,
> > suggests that they have tested the connectivity of Wikipedia in English
> and
> > French, Wikidata, and wikimedia.org, with none of them accessible. This
> may
> > intimate that it is highly that the Burmese authorities not only blocked
> "all
> > language editions of Wikipedia," but all Wikimedia projects, as a whole.
> The
> > picture also suggests that Wikipedia remains inaccessible across four
> different
> > internet service providers in Myanmar.
>
> NetBlocks really isn't a reliable source, see .
>
> Instead, I'd recommend following OONI, which published their own
> findings a few days ago:
> <
> https://ooni.org/post/2021-myanmar-internet-blocks-and-outages/#blocking-of-wikipedia
> >.
>
> -- Legoktm
>
> ___
> 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] Surveys using third party tools on Wikimedia projects

[Risker]

To clarify to anyone who doesn't want to read the actual proposal, which
Fae did not repeat here:

*Proposal*

It is proposed that on Wikimedia Commons that there must be no promotion of
surveys or questionnaires which rely on third party sites and closed source
tools, such as Google Forms. This should be interpreted as a ban against
engaging volunteers by mass messaging, use of banners or posts on
noticeboards.
*Recommended consequential action*

Banners and posts which go against this proposal may be removed by anyone.

Posting account(s) may be blocked or have group rights removed at the
discretion of administrators, such as all rights that enable mass
messaging. In a persistent case, blocks and rights removal may apply to all
accounts of the person responsible. A rationale of doing their job as part
of being a WMF employee is not considered an exemption.


Nowthis applies to everyone who posts about a survey at Wikimedia
Commons, as this proposal is strictly related to Commons. It is not a
global proposal.  However, it would apply to researchers, to WMF staff, to
anyone who uses closed-sourced tools.  There is no suggestion at all about
suitable alternative tools.  In fact, there is a severe dearth of quality
open source tools.  Researchers may be bound by their facilities to use
certain types of tools.

Surveys and questionnaires are always voluntary. There's some
responsibility on the part of the user to read the privacy statements and
use of information statements that are normally mandatory for any
legitimate surveys.  More than once I've started to participate in a survey
and decided it was asking questions I didn't want to answer, and just never
saved them.


I think it would also be helpful if someone from WMF Technical could take
the time to discuss with the broader community what arrangements have been
made in their contract with Google to ensure that the information on those
documents (of whatever nature) are not in fact accessible to Google for
their data gathering or any other purposes.  There is, of course, a certain
irony that three of the four people who have commented on this thread so
far all have Gmail email addresses.


Risker/Anne

On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 at 00:24, Gnangarra  wrote:

> I agree with Fae's proposal if we are using tools that exclude community
> members out of safety and privacy concerns then we arent fulfilling the
> equity goals. I also recognise that alternatives need to be available but
> with no incentive for them to be used then there is no development of such
> tools, or improvements to their functionality. Faes proposal is putting the
> WMF on notice that there are steps we need to take to ensure equity,
> safety, and privacy in participation.
>
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2021 at 09:08, Łukasz Garczewski <
> lukasz.garczew...@wikimedia.pl> wrote:
>
>> With respect, Fae, if you're going to propose banning an existing
>> solution, it is on you to propose a suitable alternative or at least a
>> process to find it before the ban takes effect.
>>
>> I write this as a signatory of Free Software Foundation Europe's Public
>> Money? Public Code open letter <https://publiccode.eu/openletter/>. I am
>> wholeheartedly a proponent of open source software.
>>
>> At the same time, I am a firm believer in using the best available tool
>> for the job.
>>
>> Our mission is too important to hold ourselves back at every step due to
>> a noble but often unrealistic wish to use open source solutions for
>> everything we do.
>>
>> Last year, because of my drive to use proper open source solutions, WMPL
>> wasted hours and hours of staff time (mostly mine) and a not insignificant
>> amount of members' time because:
>>
>>- Zeus, a widely used, cryptographically secure voting system is
>>impossible to setup and maintain and has very sparse documentation,
>>- CiviCRM, the premier open source CRM solution for NGOs, refuses to
>>work correctly after the Wordpress installation is moved to a new URL, and
>>documentation isn't helpful.
>>
>> To my knowledge there are no suitable open source options that would be
>> easy-to-use and robust enough to support our needs in both cases and be
>> comparable to commercial counterparts.
>>
>> I have wasted a ton of time (and therefore WMPL money), before I decided
>> to use state-of-the-art commercial solutions for the needs described above.
>> Don't be like me. Don't make other people think & act like I did. Be
>> smarter.
>>
>> Should we use an *equivalent* open source solution when one is
>> available? Yes.
>> Should we have a public list of open source tools needed? Yes.
>> Should we use programmes such as Google Summer of Code to build those
>> tools? Yes

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Thanks for all the fish! / Stepping down April 15

[Risker]

Thank you, Katherine, for all of your work to help the Wikimedia Foundation
and the Wikimedia movement grow and strengthen.  I know there have been
many challenging times, and you stepped into this role at a time when a new
type of leadership was needed - and you provided it admirably well.  You
will be missed.  I wish you the best in your future endeavours.

All the best,

Risker/Anne

On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 at 12:48, Katherine Maher  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> Earlier today, I announced to my colleagues at the Wikimedia Foundation my
> intention to step down as CEO later this spring. April 15th will be my last
> day, marking my seven-year anniversary with the Foundation and the
> movement. This was not an easy decision, but it is the right one. For now,
> I want to share with you why I’m moving on, and what comes next. I’ll save
> the customary email with deeper reflections, memories, and thanks for later
> this spring!
>
> In some ways, this was the easiest hard decision I’ve ever made. It’s
> never exactly a good time to step away -- transitions always have some
> rough edges -- but it’s always best to do so when the organization is
> strong, and before you’ve overstayed your welcome. The movement is in a
> good, strong place. Our communities are growing, our readership is too. Our
> 20th birthday, the launch of our Universal Code of Conduct, and the
> movement strategy recommendations are all milestone moments of solidity and
> strength. I have great hopes and confidence in the upcoming plans for
> strategy implementation, particularly the work on the movement charter and
> interim global council. We are healthy and thriving.
>
> While we will always have more work to do to become the Wikimedia that we
> want to be, our movement and our organization is in a phase of renewal and
> regeneration. We have deepened our practices of consultation,
> collaboration, and inclusion that will be the foundation of the next decade
> of our work. We have a deep and stable financial position that will help us
> grow and protect us from any storm, and the trust in our projects has never
> been higher. Our communities are poised to take on deeper responsibilities
> of governance, accountability, and leadership, populating a rich,
> representative, and leaderful movement for free knowledge.
>
> The Foundation is also strong, and filled with passionate, values-aligned
> leaders at every level of the organization, deeply committed to the work of
> our movement and mission. Although we don’t always all perfectly agree on
> absolutely everything, we are working more openly and cooperatively with
> our movement than ever before. Collaborative strategic planning,
> sustainable programs to support technical communities and tooling,
> co-development and consultation on transformative new experiences welcoming
> newcomers, cooperative partnerships on public health data, bibliographic
> data, and human rights data -- all of these are signals of much great work
> to come. Even difficult topics, such as brand and movement governance,
> continue to bring people together in nothing less than feisty commitment.
>
> Together, we have rich resources of brilliant people, deep passion, and
> compassion. We are making progress on some of our greatest challenges, from
> editor and readership growth, technical debt, representation and
> participation, safety and knowledge equity. I am proud of what we’ve done
> together and grateful for all the ways in which this movement has made my
> life immeasurably richer: friendships that will last a lifetime,
> intellectual curiosity and kinship, and so many memories of *so much
> dancing*, from Accra to Berlin to Chandigarh.
>
> As for me, I’m going to take a break, and a research fellowship, as a
> place to think about what’s next. It’s hard to think about your future when
> you’re fully in your present, and for the past seven years, I’ve been fully
> present for this movement. But as I look around, I see global challenges
> such as polarization, inequality, and climate change, as well as
> opportunities for generational renewal and optimism. As a Wikimedian, I
> lean toward optimism, and plan to apply myself in that direction!
>
> *What’s next*
>
>- We announced this planned transition publicly on our communications
>channels during a Foundation all-staff meeting today.
>- A Board Transition Committee composed of Dariusz Jemielniak, who is
>chair of HR Committee, Tanya Capuano, who is chair of the Audit Committee,
>Raju Narisetti, and María Sefidari as Board Chair, will launch the search
>for a new CEO. They’ll work closely with the executive Transition Team on
>organizational operations, and with the broader board on an open candidate
>call. 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board Ratification of Universal Code of Conduct

[Risker]

While I often agree with you, Yair Rand, in this case I think you're
mistaken.  Aside from the long-ago "community vote" on licensing (which was
pretty much required based on the prior licensing scheme), every
Wikimedia-wide policy has been authorized by the WMF Board of Trustees.
That includes the terms of use and the privacy policy.  As the technical
owners of the infrastructure, the WMF Board does have the right (if not the
responsibility) to identify the manner in which the websites it supports
and hosts can be used, and I think this principle is actually pretty widely
held, at least in the abstract (i.e., hosting organizations can and should
apply standards on the services they host). In every policy-related case
that I have reviewed going back to the very earliest days, there has been
at least some level of community discussion, and there have always been
detractors of every policy the Board has approved; that has not made the
policies either invalid or unworkable.

I've never been convinced that including a mixture of required, forbidden,
and aspirational standards all in one document is a good idea, and I
personally struggle to see how including essentially unenforceable aspects
of the UCoC will do anything other than weaken the effectiveness of rest of
the document.  For example, I cannot imagine anyone being sanctioned in any
way for "failure to thank" or "failure to mentor", although both of these
are considered expectations in the "Civility" section; and one thing that a
Uniform Code of Conduct would logically have is a uniform enforcement
scheme.

Nonetheless, I do believe that it is within the Board's scope and
responsibility to approve this and other global policies designed to
protect the WMF, the projects, the users of the websites, and the content
managers/editors/etc (what we often call "the community").

Risker/Anne



On Tue, 2 Feb 2021 at 17:28, Yair Rand  wrote:

> The community has not approved the WMF's UCoC. It is not a Wikimedia
> policy, it is not binding, it has no authority. The WMF does not control
> the Wikimedia projects, and has no jurisdiction in this area.
>
> The community rejected this over and over again. It is harmful that the
> Board is pretending they can do this unilaterally.
>
> -- Yair Rand
>
> ‫בתאריך יום ג׳, 2 בפבר׳ 2021 ב-6:59 מאת ‪María Sefidari‬‏ <‪
> ma...@wikimedia.org‬‏>:‬
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I’m pleased to announce that the Board of Trustees has unanimously
>> approved a Universal Code of Conduct for the Wikimedia projects and
>> movement.[1]  A Universal Code of Conduct was one of the final
>> recommendations of the Movement Strategy 2030 process - a multi-year,
>> participatory community effort to define the future of our movement. The
>> final Universal Code of Conduct seeks to address disparities in conduct
>> policies across our hundreds of projects and communities, by creating a
>> binding minimum set of standards for conduct on the Wikimedia projects that
>> directly address many of the challenges that contributors face.
>>
>> The Board is deeply grateful to the communities who have grappled with
>> these challenging topics. Over the past six months, communities around the
>> world have participated in conversations and consultations to help build
>> this code collectively, including local discussions in 19 languages,
>> surveys, discussions on Meta, and policy drafting by a committee of
>> volunteers and staff. The document presented to us reflects a significant
>> investment of time and effort by many of you, and especially by the joint
>> staff/volunteer committee who created the base draft after reviewing input
>> collected from community outreach efforts. We also appreciate the
>> dedication of the Foundation, and its Trust & Safety policy team, in
>> getting us to this phase.
>>
>> This was the first phase of our Universal Code of Conduct - from here,
>> the Trust & Safety team will begin consultations on how best to enforce
>> this code. In the coming weeks, they will follow-up with more instructions
>> on how you can participate in discussions around enforcing the new code.
>> Over the next few months, they will be facilitating consultation
>> discussions in many local languages, with our affiliates, and on Meta to
>> support a new volunteer/staff committee in drafting enforcement pathways.
>> For more information on the process, timeline, and how to participate in
>> this next phase, please review the Universal Code of Conduct page on
>> Meta.[2]
>>
>> The Universal Code of Conduct represents an essential step towards our
>> vision of a world in which all people can participate in the sum of all
>> knowle

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Foundation commitment of support for LGBT+ volunteers

[Risker]

I'm sorry that you've chosen to hijack this thread, Rodhullandemu.
Nonetheless, I will point out that it was *me* who indefinitely blocked you
in the middle of an arbitration case, for reasons that didn't actually have
anything to do with the case, and for edits that met the requirements for
suppression.  Those edits were also reported to the predecessor of the
Trust & Safety department at the time. There was also nothing to do with
Usenet - it was your own words that resulted in your block.  I hope that
the circumstances that led to your block have improved significantly since
that time. Your block remains appealable to the current Arbitration
Committee, and I am certain neither I nor Roger Davies (who subsequently
reblocked you to remove email access) would object to the block being
reviewed.

Returning to the key subject of this thread, I thank Trust & Safety for
making a statement, and also thank our colleagues for arranging
translations into other languages.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 8 Dec 2020 at 19:07, Phil Nash via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Great news. Vulnerable contributors to Wikimedia projects should be owed a
> duty of care, not least because they make good, well-informed
> contributions, but also that those projects should not become the preserve
> of a socially and politically advantaged elite.
>
> However, what he have here is only much less than half of the story. Those
> who are falsely accused of unacceptable, maybe criminal behaviour, when
> there is a significant lack of evidence to support that, have little or no
> comeback. Minds seem to be irretrievably poisoned against you.
>
> I make no secret of the fact that I am User:Rodhullandemu on multiple
> Wikimedia projects. I was blocked or banned (it's not been made clear) on
> en:WP in 2011 on the basis of some fake Usenet posts that Roger Davies
> found, and for some reason gave credence to, despite the policy
> [[:en:WP:Usenet]]. There is no pretending that this is not the case, given
>
> ---
> New Outlook Express and Windows Live Mail replacement - get it here:
> https://www.oeclassic.com/
>
> the entry in my block log on en:WP. As an experienced user on Wikipedia, I
> know exactly what "Refer all enquiries to Arbitration Committee" means.
> It's a code which everybody understands, and as it stands, is a defamatory
> libel as an innuendo.
>
> I have asked Roger to copy those Usenet posts to me, compete with headers.
> I have no doubt that he will be unable, or will refuse, to do so.
>
> Meanwhile, I cannot trust ArbCom to understand their role in relation to
> due processs and the rules of natural justice, given the recent input into
> my desysop on Commons from two sitting arbs, one of whom was such in 2011,
> and one of their clerks. So I can't ask them to unblock me. They are
> irretrievably poisoned.
>
> Meanwhile, WMF T refused to do anything to intervene when someone
> misguidedly complained about me to them. Shameful, as I said at the time. I
> deserve at least as much as those who are against me. Jimbo Wales's
> decision on my appeal against my block missed the point completely. He
> suggested that I shoud prove myself sane. That's both impossible and
> ridiculous, and mentioned in my RFA on Commons.
>
> Time, perhaps, for the WMF to get its act together and say to people "That
> was the wrong thing to do, and we have no hesitation in correcting it".
> Fortunately I am no longer alone; I have people interested in exposing the
> arbitrariness of arbitration.
>
> Phil Nash/Rodhullandemu
>
>
>
>
>
> *- Original Message -*
> *From:* Maggie Dennis 
> *Reply-To:* Wikimedia Mailing List 
> *To:* Wikimedia Mailing List 
> *Sent:* 08/12/2020 15:24:15
> *Subject:* [Wikimedia-l] Foundation commitment of support for LGBT+
> volunteers
> --
>
> Hello.
>
>
> My name is Maggie Dennis. I’m the Vice President of Community Resilience
> and Sustainability at the Wikimedia Foundation.[1] I oversee the
> Foundation’s Trust and Safety teams (operations and policy), the Community
> Development team, and the upcoming Foundation Human Rights lead.
>
> On December 2nd, I met with representatives of the Wikimedia LGBT+ User
> Group along with several Trust and Safety personnel, including Global Head
> Jan Eißfeldt, to understand some of the challenges faced by the members of
> the group as volunteers in our international movement.[2] It is apparent
> that many volunteers openly identifying as LGBTQIA+ are targeted and
> attacked for their identities, with transgender, non-binary, queer, and
> queer feminist editors in particular at higher risk for such abuse. The
> members of the group who met with us voiced concerns abo

Re: [Wikimedia-l] New feature from Community Tech: Watchlist Expiry

[Risker]

Thank you!

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 19:26, Ilana Fried  wrote:

> Hello everyone,
>
> I'm very excited to announce a new feature created by the Community Tech
> [1] team: Watchlist Expiry. With this feature, you can optionally select
> to watch a page for a temporary period of time. This feature is now
> available on all wikis. It was developed in response to the #7 request[2]
> in the 2019 Community Wishlist Survey[3]. To learn more, you can check out
> the Help:Watchlist_Expiry[4] page on Mediawiki.org, as well as the project
> page[5]. Since this is a new feature, we invite you to share your feedback. 
> Thank
> you, and we look forward to checking out your feedback on the project talk
> page![6]
>
> Thank you!
>
> Ilana Fried
>
> Product Manager, Community Tech
>
> [1]. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech
>
> [2].
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2019/Watchlists/Watchlist_item_expiration
>
> [3]. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Wishlist_Survey_2019
>
> [4]. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Watchlist_expiry
>
> [5]. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Community_Tech/Watchlist_Expiry
>
> [6]. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_Tech/Watchlist_Expiry
>
> ___
> 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] online meetings

[Risker]

Perhaps a way to think about it would be to pause meetings at which
decisions are being made or "official" opinions are being collected,
without expecting any pauses in more socially oriented meetings.  So,
perhaps an embargo on most WMF-sponsored meetings, as well as formal
meetings of our constituent organizations and groups including committees
and perhaps even chapter/user group committees; co-editing sessions, online
meetups, chatting cafes, etc that are more social in orientation and are
optional participation could quite easily continue, and may even be
particularly beneficial for those who are socially isolated because of the
ongoing efforts to reduce the impact of the current health crisis.

In reality, I expect that there's already a plan to put many if not all
WMF-sponsored meetings/sessions on hold for a several-week break starting
mid-December; this is a practice that has been in place for a couple of
years, and I believe the WMF maintains only a skeleton crew for at least a
week during that period.

Risker/Anne

On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 at 18:46, Gnangarra  wrote:

> Kaya Jan
>
> Yes I agree,  I'm not asking for an absolute ban on all meetings,  just
> that we give pause as and where possible.
>
> Boodarwun
>
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 at 00:39, Jan Ainali  wrote:
>
>> Hello Gnangarra,
>>
>> I really like your sentiment and appreciate your effort to keep the
>> community healthy. However, we should acknowledge that with the ongoing
>> pandemic, not everyone is able to visit their families. Over the years a
>> lot of friendships have been formed in our community as well. Being able
>> to collaborate with them might be a very nice feeling for many.
>>
>> So as a compromise, I suggest not to enforce a complete stop for online
>> meetings, but rather just pause the kind of meetings where important
>> decisions are being taken. Friendly meetups, chatting cafés or co-editing
>> sessions might be just what is needed for many to stay in a positive state
>> of mind. As long as they don't *require* people to join because their voice
>> would not be heard on some matter I believe online meetings are just fine.
>>
>> Warm regards
>> Jan Ainali
>>
>> Den mån 16 nov. 2020 kl 04:11 skrev Gnangarra :
>>
>>> Kaya
>>>
>>> Over the last 9 months the movement has really taken to the use of
>>> "zoom" style technology to hold and host events, I dont doubt they have
>>> been really productive in addressing the many needs of the community.
>>>
>>> One thing I have noticed is just how many of these notices are coming
>>> through now with some meetings taking place not once but multiple times to
>>> ensure everyone has access to them in their best time period.
>>>
>>> I know as volunteers we are able to pick and choose what we do, I also
>>> know we are placing a lot of pressure on affiliates to be upto date on all
>>> these events.  I raise a concern that perhaps we as a community are
>>> starting to over do these meetings and stretch volunteer resources to point
>>> of breaking or being overwhelmed.  I know that as WP20 approaches these
>>> meetings are going to accelerate and put greater demands on our limited
>>> resources.
>>>
>>> I propose that the community has a quiet period from the 14 December to
>>> 5th January where we dont hold general meetings, webinars, cafes, and
>>> strategy discussions to give people time to refresh and focus on family.
>>> Obviously some small group focused community meetings will be necessary as
>>> part of WP20 and other preparations so I'm not suggesting ruling out all
>>> meetings just asking that we remember that there is life outside of the
>>> movement we should be allowing people time to focus on as well.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Gnangarra
>>>
>>> *Power of Diverse Collaboration*
>>> *Sharing knowledge brings people together*
>>> Wikimania Bangkok 2021
>>> August
>>> hosted by ESEAP
>>>
>>> Wikimania: https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Gnangarra
>>> Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page
>>> My print shop: https://www.redbubble.com/people/Gnangarra/shop?asc=u
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> 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/list

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustees elections, membership, quorum, and

[Risker]

Functionaries (checkusers, oversighters, stewards, OTRS members, and people
with similar advanced permissions) have not been required to provide their
personal information - name, DOB, address - for years.  They simply sign
off a type of confidentiality agreement with their username.

Risker/Anne

On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 13:52, Todd Allen  wrote:

> Well, you could always do a nominal membership contribution, like a penny,
> or sponsorships for those who wish to join but don't have the money. Since
> WMF makes its money primarily from donations, there's really no need for it
> to actually sustain itself from membership fees.
>
> So far as requiring non-pseudonymous membership, I don't think there's any
> requirement that such member lists be made public. So it would work a lot
> like functionaries giving their information for the private access policy;
> they are required to verify their identity, but that will be held privately
> and not available to the public. So for all intents and purposes,
> pseudonymous membership would still be possible.
>
> Todd
>
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 11:46 AM Risker  wrote:
>
> > Without needing to go into further detail, it is because to be a
> membership
> > organization, pseudonyms aren't acceptable; all members must provide
> their
> > full legal names and addresses.  I also cannot think of a membership
> > organization that does not charge a membership fee, although I suppose it
> > is possible; but anything requiring a financial contribution would limit
> > the membership to those who have the money to pay to join, which is
> > antithetical to the movement's philosophy.
> >
> > Risker/Anne
> >
> > On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 13:41, Todd Allen  wrote:
> >
> > > Why would we "not want it to be a membership organization"? In fact,
> many
> > > of us want exactly that, since the WMF seems to think it can lord it
> over
> > > the communities instead of fulfilling its role of serving them.
> > >
> > > The new Board rules basically say that the Board itself gets to say how
> > the
> > > community-based members are selected, instead of having actual bylaws
> as
> > to
> > > how it happens. I'd like to see it done very simply: Those eight seats
> > > (forming a majority) on the Board should be elected (not nominated,
> > > elected) by the community, with the Board having no veto power over the
> > > results of the election.
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 12:45 PM Brad Patrick 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is a very, very old and tired argument. If you do not understand
> > > > United States non-profit corporations, go educate yourself about
> those
> > > > first. If your perspective is non-US based, you may have a different
> > > frame
> > > > of mind which is irreconcilable with the way WMF is. Take all the
> time
> > > you
> > > > need to see the differences before attacking WMF for (a) what it is
> and
> > > (b)
> > > > why it isn't what you want it to be.
> > > >
> > > > WMF exists legally, and has as its foundation organizational
> principle,
> > > > authority vested in a Board. WMF is not a membership organization.
> You
> > > > would not want it to be a membership organization (as a matter of
> law).
> > > >
> > > > Please temper your criticism accordingly.
> > > >
> > > > Brad Patrick
> > > > Former WMF General Counsel
> > > >
> > > > On 10/7/20, 12:47 PM, "Wikimedia-l on behalf of Paulo Santos
> Perneta"
> > <
> > > > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of
> > > > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I knew they are theoretically self-appointed, but was under the
> > > > impression
> > > > that at least until now an appearance of democracy and legitimacy
> > > > towards
> > > > the community has been respected, which no longer seems to be the
> > > case.
> > > > I wonder what would be the legitimacy of a self-appointing body
> in
> > > the
> > > > eyes
> > > > of the Wikimedia Movement, and all the communities which are part
> > of
> > > > it?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Paulo
> > > >
> > > > Adam Wight  escreveu no dia quarta,
> > > > 7/10/2020 à(s)
> > > > 17:20:
&

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board of Trustees elections, membership, quorum, and

[Risker]

Without needing to go into further detail, it is because to be a membership
organization, pseudonyms aren't acceptable; all members must provide their
full legal names and addresses.  I also cannot think of a membership
organization that does not charge a membership fee, although I suppose it
is possible; but anything requiring a financial contribution would limit
the membership to those who have the money to pay to join, which is
antithetical to the movement's philosophy.

Risker/Anne

On Thu, 8 Oct 2020 at 13:41, Todd Allen  wrote:

> Why would we "not want it to be a membership organization"? In fact, many
> of us want exactly that, since the WMF seems to think it can lord it over
> the communities instead of fulfilling its role of serving them.
>
> The new Board rules basically say that the Board itself gets to say how the
> community-based members are selected, instead of having actual bylaws as to
> how it happens. I'd like to see it done very simply: Those eight seats
> (forming a majority) on the Board should be elected (not nominated,
> elected) by the community, with the Board having no veto power over the
> results of the election.
>
> Todd
>
> On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 12:45 PM Brad Patrick  wrote:
>
> > This is a very, very old and tired argument. If you do not understand
> > United States non-profit corporations, go educate yourself about those
> > first. If your perspective is non-US based, you may have a different
> frame
> > of mind which is irreconcilable with the way WMF is. Take all the time
> you
> > need to see the differences before attacking WMF for (a) what it is and
> (b)
> > why it isn't what you want it to be.
> >
> > WMF exists legally, and has as its foundation organizational principle,
> > authority vested in a Board. WMF is not a membership organization. You
> > would not want it to be a membership organization (as a matter of law).
> >
> > Please temper your criticism accordingly.
> >
> > Brad Patrick
> > Former WMF General Counsel
> >
> > On 10/7/20, 12:47 PM, "Wikimedia-l on behalf of Paulo Santos Perneta" <
> > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of
> > paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I knew they are theoretically self-appointed, but was under the
> > impression
> > that at least until now an appearance of democracy and legitimacy
> > towards
> > the community has been respected, which no longer seems to be the
> case.
> > I wonder what would be the legitimacy of a self-appointing body in
> the
> > eyes
> > of the Wikimedia Movement, and all the communities which are part of
> > it?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Paulo
> >
> > Adam Wight  escreveu no dia quarta,
> > 7/10/2020 à(s)
> > 17:20:
> >
> > > Greetings, this is a semiautomated response pointing out that the
> > > Wikimedia Foundation Board is not elected, it's self-appointing.
> The
> > > so-called "elections" are in fact nominations to be considered by
> the
> > > Board.  Therefore, the Bylaws have not been broken.
> > >
> > > This is an unfortunate arrangement, please see [1] for some
> > background
> > > about the conversion from a membership organization to a
> > non-membership
> > > organization which is no longer legally required to hold elections.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Adam W.
> > > [[mw:User:Adamw]]
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_membership_controversy
> > >
> > > On 10/7/20 5:55 PM, Paulo Santos Perneta wrote:
> > > > The terms of 3 BoT members expired last month, and the BoT itself
> > decided
> > > > to extend them? What is the legitimacy of that? And why is a BoT
> > which is
> > > > expected to be in a mere interim management waiting for
> elections,
> > > > presenting profound changes to its Bylaws [1]?
> > > >
> > > > [1] -
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Board_noticeboard/October_2020_-_Proposed_Bylaws_changes
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Paulo
> > > >
> > > > Nataliia Tymkiv  escreveu no dia quarta,
> > > 7/10/2020
> > > > à(s) 16:49:
> > > >
> > > >> Hello,
&g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Summit 2021 in Berlin cancelled

[Risker]

I'm not entirely certain that people outside of Europe necessarily were
aware that the in-person meeting was going to be cancelled, or at least
that a decision/announcement to cancel it would be made this far in
advance. I agree that cancellation, even seven  months before the scheduled
meeting, is an appropriate decision.

I too am a bit disappointed that there doesn't appear to be any planning
for some sort of virtual meeting, though. It will definitely affect
strategy implementation.

Risker/Anne

On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 at 12:59, effe iets anders 
wrote:

> Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I think the point of this message is to say
> that nothing virtual will be organized either (we already knew no physical
> meeting was going to happen). Which brings lots of questions as to how that
> affects the strategy implementation.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 12:19 AM Rajeeb  wrote:
>
> > Very sad to hear that, hopefully a virtual one will make us happy.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Rajeeb.
> > (U:Marajozkee).
> >
> > On Thu, 24 Sep 2020 at 12:31, Abraham Taherivand <
> > abraham.taheriv...@wikimedia.de> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear all,
> > >
> > > It’s with regret that we have to inform you that due to the continued
> > > global health situation (COVID-19), the meeting of the Wikimedia Summit
> > > 2021
> > > and related side events in Berlin have been cancelled.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We optimistically look forward to safely reconvening in Berlin in 2022.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > >
> > > Abraham Taherivand, Executive Director Wikimedia Deutschland
> > >
> > > Katherine Maher, Executive Director Wikimedia Foundation
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Geschäftsführender Vorstand / Executive Director
> > >
> > > Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> > > Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> > > http://wikimedia.de
> > > ___
> > > 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>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Updates from Wikimedia Foundation Board

[Risker]

Nataliia, thank you very much for this update.

I'd suggest it is essential for the community and its members to recognize
that the situation in which the WMF, tens of thousands of other similar
organizations, entire nations, and each of us as individuals is
unprecedented in modern life; the closest parallel occurred more than a
century ago. Flexibility in action and thought is essential in order to
obtain the best long-range outcome.  Everyone, almost without exception,
has had to make changes in their lives, their interactions, and their
processes in order to survive, let alone thrive.

Speaking as someone who has been heavily invested in the strategic planning
process, I view the expansion of the board in a very positive light.  The
Covid-19 pandemic has thrown a lot of the ambitious (and in some cases,
potentially very costly) recommendations in the draft strategy into sharp
relief due to the sudden and unplanned instability of the global financial
situation, which will impact us as a movement just as it affects
individuals, countries, industries, and other charitable organizations
around the world.We should be honest about this, and also recall that
the strategy is intended to be a set of long-term goals, so taking a first
step toward expanded and broader representation is entirely in keeping with
movement toward those goals without drawing excessively on our uncertain
financial resources.

I think it's reasonable, due to the exceptional global circumstances as
well as the planned changes in Board composition, to extend the terms of
currently community-selected representatives.  It's likely that there will
be more certainty in the situation in 4-8 months, and the WMF and the
Wikimedia community will be better placed to identify and attract excellent
candidates for community-selected, affiliate-selected, and appointed
seats.  Right now, many who might ordinarily be willing candidates are not
in a position to make such a multi-year commitment; thousands of members of
our communities have had their lives suddenly disrupted in a multitude of
ways, without certainty of employment, financial stability, health, or
family circumstances. The delay will also permit a richer discussion on how
to implement the changes to board structure.

This same degree of uncertainty also makes it not just reasonable, but
probably quite wise, to extend the timeline for the Annual Plan.  Many
activities that have become routine over the years must be reconsidered in
light of changing circumstances.  For example, many of the international
in-person meetings may need to be rethought, and there may need to be
research and development to find alternate ways to carry out these
educational, decision-making, and communal activities.  I will be very
interested to see how the next Annual Plan will address financial
uncertainty:  our organization's reputation has been enhanced by the
community's actions in relation to the Covid-19 crisis (which could have a
positive effect on donations and grants), but many potential
donors/grant-makers may find themselves unable to maintain even their
current level of donations, let alone enhance them.

It is entirely within the scope of the Board to change bylaws and implement
all of the changes that have been discussed in Nataliia's message on behalf
of the Board.

Risker/Anne



On Sat, 2 May 2020 at 19:21, Pine W  wrote:

> Andy, I was going off of this statement: "In order to ensure sustained
> community representation on the Board, we are extending the terms of
> the three community-selected trustees currently occupying those seats
> (María, Dariusz, and James) for up to a year until we are all ready to
> run the postponed process"
>
> That is different from saying that the Board will ask the community if
> the community wants to postpone elections. I would understand and
> support the latter, but not the former. I don't want the WMF Board to
> start down the path of deciding if and when the community will hold
> elections for community-nominated seats. This should be a decision for
> the community, and the community alone, to decide.
>
> By the way, has the Elections Committee been consulted regarding any of
> this?
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Practical implications of Coronavirus

[Risker]

Regardless of what platforms people might want to use for virtual meetings,
it is my personal opinion that all movement organizations, groups (formal
and informal) and the WMF itself immediately stop meeting in person. For
the movement entities that have offices, work-from-home should be the
standard (as it has been for the WMF for almost a week).  Edit-a-thons and
similar meet-ups should be cancelled for the foreseeable future.  The broad
movement has spent a lot of time talking about the safety and security of
its communities, and this level of social distancing at this time is
probably the best way to demonstrate that we really mean what we say.
#CancelEverything is not just a cute hashtag - it's really serious, and our
movement can be leaders in showing how it is done.

I'm speaking from my own experience (having worked in a hospital with SARS
patients and having participated in the development of pandemic plans for
hospitals), so perhaps my perspective is different from other people's. But
given there's very little downside to this proposal, there's no reason not
to take these steps, at least for a few months while the world has a better
sense of how this will all play out.

Risker/Anne
___
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] Wikimedia Summit 2020 in Berlin cancelled

[Risker]

Thank you for informing the global community of this.  More importantly,
thank you for recognizing that the safety and well-being of the global
community should take precedence over a meeting.  This is the way to "walk
the talk" about community safety.

Risker/Anne

On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 14:06, Abraham Taherivand <
abraham.taheriv...@wikimedia.de> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> It’s with regret that we have to inform you that due to the global health
> situation (COVID-19), the physical meeting of the Wikimedia Summit 2020 and
> related side events in Berlin have been cancelled.
>
> Since we currently look into hosting the Summit in a series of virtual
> meetings, starting at the dates of the Summit, please keep the dates
> blocked in your calendar.
>
> We are aware that this announcement will cause many questions (not only in
> relation to the Summit). Please be patient, more information will follow
> from our teams in the next few days.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Abraham Taherivand, Executive Director Wikimedia Deutschland
>
> Katherine Maher, Executive Director Wikimedia Foundation
>
>
> --
>
> Geschäftsführender Vorstand / Executive Director
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
> http://wikimedia.de
> ___
> 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] Next steps on Wikimedia Space

[Risker]

I do think that there are benefits in continuing to explore
WMF/movement-managed communication tools outside of the onwiki/IRC/mailing
list paradigm; we have long known that a lot of voices are excluded from
using these channels, and that is not helpful in growing a large,
international, multilingual movement.  We've also used YouTube for quite a
long time, and it has not been particularly problematic, but it's not
really a discussion platform, more an information-sharing one.  I noticed
that Wikimedia Space does have a higher than average concentration of posts
from outside the "English speaking" world that simply doesn't happen on
Meta.

On the other hand, I also agree that moving "official" communications to
platforms outside of the control of the WMF/movement,  like Facebook and
Twitter, are (for many of us in the movement) very problematic from a
privacy perspective, as well as unsatisfactory from an accessibility
perspective.

"Onwiki" is a nice concept.  The challenge here is that there are 700+
"onwiki" platforms, and only one hypothetically dedicated to inter-project
discussions, that being Meta.  I would venture to guess that probably
85-90% of Wikimedians either don't know Meta exists as a discussion
platform, or have tried to participate in a discussion there only to find
that it will often move very fast, is dominated by the English language
almost to the point of exclusion, and that their voice is drowned out
quickly or they are challenged in a way that makes them feel uncomfortable.
It's not helpful to take the "stay out of the kitchen if you can't stand
the heat" attitude, as it's neither welcoming nor accepting of other
ideas.  Meta is also very, very difficult to navigate; even I have
considerable difficulty finding material that I know for a fact exists on
that platform.  And we all know that Meta is not at all good at sharing
information and news about what's happening in other projects, or for
multiple projects (e.g., several projects in the same language, several
Wikisources, etc) to work together.

Wikimedia Space didn't feel like the right fit for us, either.  In
particular, I found it hard to figure out how to do things (like making
hyperlinks) that I've been doing comfortably on other existing platforms
for years.  But I think it is a worthwhile idea to keep looking for a
platform that isn't commercially/externally controlled (thus "selling" the
private information of our users) that works for more people. I think we
also need to figure out how to support multi-project discussions better
without pushing them all out to what is intended to be a global,
movement-wide platform (i.e., Meta).  Experiments are always worthwhile, as
they're opportunities to learn.  I will trust that Quim and the rest of the
Wikimedia Space team will be summarizing the positives and negatives about
this particular experiment.

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 17:49, Rebecca O'Neill 
wrote:

> I've been involved in the movement for ~7 years, took one look at IRC and
> walked very quickly the other way, having used it 15+ years ago. I'm all
> for retro, but that was taking it too far.
> Relying on a tool that has been been haemorrhaging users for years, and
> golden years are seen as around 20 years ago, seems less than ideal.
>
> On Wed, 19 Feb 2020 at 22:37, Todd Allen  wrote:
>
> > Then, they're welcome to pop on in any time. If they choose not to, well,
> > no one can make them. Anyone is able to use those tools.
> >
> > Todd
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 3:32 PM Guillaume Paumier <
> gpaum...@wikimedia.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Le mer. 19 févr. 2020 à 10:31, Todd Allen  a
> > écrit :
> > >
> > > > I don't think anyone had bad intentions. It was just redundant.
> > > >
> > > > Real time communication is on IRC. Asynchronous communication is
> either
> > > on
> > > > the wiki, preferably, or on the mailing list.
> > > >
> > > > Quit trying to make us TwitFaceTube. The tools we already have work
> > just
> > > > fine.
> > >
> > >
> > > That perspective suffers from a lack of empathy. "The tools we already
> > > have" may work for the limited sample of the population who are
> currently
> > > using them. Assuming that that sample is representative is flawed and
> is
> > a
> > > classic example of survivorship bias. If we have learned anything from
> > the
> > > Space experiment and from years of strategy discussions, it is that the
> > > tools we currently have do not, in fact, work just fine for a large
> > number
> > > of people, whose voices are missing from our discussions and content.
&g

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Wikimedia Foundation elections committee: Call for volunteers

[Risker]

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees election is logically run by the
Wikimedia Foundation, just as elections for other movement entities are
logically run by those specific entities.

The Board of Trustees is responsible for monitoring the election and for
the tasking of and appointment of the Election Committee.  (Similarly,
other movement entities do exactly the same thing.) There are some
constricts built into the bylaws of the organization that identify certain
qualifications for candidates for elected seats.  The WMF staff member(s)
involved in the election are there primarily as facilitators to ensure that
the decisions made by the committee are enacted in a timely way.  They're
there to make sure stuff gets done, in other words.  They're not there to
make the decisions; that responsibility is squarely in the purview of the
Committee.

I confess I am disappointed that the existing Election Committee did not
complete its assigned tasks of reviewing different types of voting, leading
community discussions, and identifying a specific preference.  Given that
the final result of the election will need to be released later than
mid-May 2020, and there is a minimum 10-week period before the polls close
to identify, qualify, and allow questioning of candidates, there is not
sufficient time to carry out much more than preliminary research on
alternate voting methods.  The recent experience with the movement-entity
board member selection process - in which some organizations clearly did
not understand the rules of engagement and had to ask for a "new" ballot -
illustrate the problem with not having sufficient time to really understand
and implement a different voting system.  Bluntly put, the Election
Commission should have completed its work in this regard by now if there
was any chance of changing  voting systems. It's been on the table as
something that needed to be done for at least 4 years, and is in fact the
reason that the Board created a "permanent" Election Commission instead of
one that gets appointed just to run a particular election.

The reality is that people who are good at actually running elections are
usually not the same people who are good at analysing and recommending
election processes.  Thus, it's really hard to find the right mix of
membership for a permanent Election Committee.  Comparatively speaking,
there are a lot more people who are proficient at the mechanics of
organizing and running elections; the only significant difference between
running a board election and running an Enwiki Arbitration Committee
election is scale (and perhaps better familiarity with Meta).

It's also essential that everyone on the committee pulls their weight.  In
the past, Election Committees have suffered from having people on board who
simply disappear after their appointment and don't do anything (or show up
so sporadically that they're more a hindrance than a help), leaving it to
an even smaller subgroup of the committee to make decisions and do the
work.  This is really a problem, and it's almost impossible to fix once the
work of the election has started.  The work for the 2020 election should be
startingwell, it probably already should have started.

Risker/Anne







On Sun, 12 Jan 2020 at 19:44, Pine W  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> As far as I know, there has been no functioning Elections Committee in
> awhile. I think that there should be one, and I am glad to see the interest
> in reviving it. So, thanks for the message, Joe.
>
> In the long term, similar to my opinion about separating the Ombudsman
> Commission from WMF, I would like to have the Elections Committee be
> independent from WMF. However, as far as I know, there is no other
> organization that is able and willing to host community authorities which
> would not be under WMF's control or substantial influence. (WMF can
> exercise significant influence over Wikimedia affiliates by restricting
> their use of Wikimedia trademarks and/or their grant funding.) I hope that
> the possibility of having one or more such legally and financially
> independent organizations is being considered as a part of the 2030
> strategy process.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> ___
> 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: ht

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Ombuds Commission now accepting nominations for 2020

[Risker]

Just noting in passing that, technically, the Ombudsman Commission formally
reports to the WMF Board of Trustees, which has in turn delegated the
ongoing management and responsibility for the commission to the WMF Trust &
Safety Department.  In other words, the OC has always been a "WMF"
committee, charged with enforcing WMF board-approved policies, most
particularly the privacy policy.

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 16:44, Pine W  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Sorry that I'm late replying to this thread. I have been very busy in the
> past few weeks.
>
> I have a proposal that likely will not affect the current round of
> appointments because implementation would require some time and careful
> deliberation. This proposal isn't intended as a personal critique.
>
> I would like to see the selection process for OC be done by the community
> with WMF consent, similar to how stewards are appointed. I think it's
> important that community members not be viewed as agents of WMF, and the
> current system for OC appointments seems to imply that WMF has authority to
> oversee or to control the use of advanced permissions and the OC as an
> organization. I think that this should be flipped, with WMF supporting
> community institutions and not the other way around. I'm okay with WMF
> being involved in the selection process for OC candidates by conducting
> background checks on candidates and having some limited veto authority, but
> WMF's role should primarily be one of providing support to community
> members and institutions such as the OC.
>
> Thank you for listening.
>
> Pine
> ( https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Pine )
> ___
> 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] [LGBT] Best practices for awarding scholarships

[Risker]

I've never created a Wikidata profile about anyone, not even someone who is
widely known.  I've never created or edited a biographical article about
someone who isn't really obviously notable, and who has a broad and widely
known profile as verified in multiple non-Wikimedia (or
Wikipedia/Wikimedia-related) sources.

No, I would never create an article about a Wikimedian - or a Wikidata
profile either - unless they are clearly and obviously notable outside of
our little microcosm.  Frankly, with very few exceptions, almost nobody
whose "notability" is primarily related to this movement is actually
notable in the strictest reading of the policies of most of our Wikipedia
projects.  As far as I'm concerned, most of the Wikipedia/Wikimedia/other
project-related articles on most of our projects are a prime example of
navel-gazing rather than actual notability.

Further, I think it's terrible use of Wikidata to use it to store what are
essentially the personnel records of Wikimedia volunteers.

Risker/Anne



On Wed, 9 Oct 2019 at 09:52, Henry Wood  wrote:

> Risker
>
> > I'm pretty shocked at this idea; in fact, if someone created a Wikidata
> > profile about me, I'd have it taken down under applicable legislation.
>
> ... and yet you are an energetic volunteer for projects that assert
> the right to do that to other people?
>
> Henry
>
> ___
> 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] [LGBT] Best practices for awarding scholarships

[Risker]

I'm pretty shocked at this idea; in fact, if someone created a Wikidata
profile about me, I'd have it taken down under applicable legislation.
Making financial support contingent on adding one's name to a publicly
editable database does not seem to be particularly wise, nor for that
matter particularly equitable; dozens if not hundreds of Wikimedians who
have received sponsorships/scholarships to date live in places where
publicly linking oneself to Wikipedia or its sister projects could be
actively harmful to them.  There are very, very few reasons for requiring a
Wikimedian to publicly provide information about themselves in this way.

Getting back to the original question:  a lot of what would constitute best
practices depends on the purpose of the scholarship. Is it a local or
regional event? Is there a particular focus on the event (e.g., development
of technical skills such as a hackathon, leadership education, new editor
recruitment, a particular wikiproject such as Wikisource or Wikiquote,
etc.)?  Are there particular underrepresented groups that you want to
encourage?  All of these are worth considering, so that scholarships can be
targeted in a way that is most likely to achieve the goals of the event.

Also...consider whether you want to extend scholarships to people with a
"proven track record" primarily, or to those who are new or even not yet
part of the community.  If you're going for the "proven track record"
objective, consider what you'd count in favour of evidence of engagement:
local/regional/chapter/user group activities, on-wiki activities, holding
roles of responsibility either onwiki or offwiki, publishing research about
Wikimedia projects, years involved, etc.

Finally, decide what you want to ask the scholarship recipients to give you
in return.  Do you want them to commit to writing a report? commit to
sharing information with other groups/local editors/etc?

I'd encourage those offering scholarships to be forthright in identifying
the criteria that will be used to assess the applicants in advance, as much
as possible.  If this is a large event and you'll be making an open
invitation for scholarship applicants, it's important that you tell them
what kind of applicant you are looking for, what the scholarship includes
and excludes (e.g., travel, registration, accommodation, meals or per
diem), and what you expect in return for the scholarship.

Risker/Anne



On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 at 16:39, Lane Rasberry  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I have wished that eventually when people apply for scholarships or even
> when they attend wiki events they create profiles for themselves in
> Wikidata so that we could generate visualizations of the demographics of
> participants.
>
> I do not think the wiki movement is quite ready for this, but if we
> actually want to track and report demographics, doing so in Wikidata is
> probably the way most natural for the wiki community.
>
> On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 9:27 AM Fæ  wrote:
>
> > Plans for a Wikimedia LGBT+ conference and workshops in 2020 are
> > moving forward. We would very much like to learn and borrow successful
> > experiences from other conferences. This conference is expected to be
> > relatively modest in size, around 50 attendees, and is to be hosted in
> > Linz, Austria.
> >
> > We are planning on opening up applications for scholarships very soon,
> > to allow several months for early booking of travel tickets and visa
> > applications where needed. Naturally this means we have to create a
> > process for assessing applications to a hopefully short and
> > non-subjective checklist (we are all volunteers after all!).
> >
> > Can anyone recommend documented good practices for assessing
> > applications for travel grants and expenses for similar sized events?
> > Some issues we have discussed that need to be addressed before
> > finalizing our policies are:
> > * Creating a fair assessment process that balances the diversity of
> > attendees against other metrics like on-project experience, for
> > example ensuring that we have a healthy gender balance and a wide
> > geographic representation
> > * Whether it may be better to prefer the simplicity of assessing for
> > full scholarships, or whether partial payments are a good way of
> > ensuring wider access
> > * How to draw up rules for travel and partial scholarships for folks
> > planning on making this part of a holiday, as often happens for those
> > travelling long distances
> > * When to recommend that specific Wikimedia Affiliates should provide
> > grants and expenses, which may have additional requirements for
> > applications and reporting
> > * How to build in incentives for greener travel options, even where
> > this may not be th

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

[Risker]

Ziko and others - please, please provide your feedback to all of the
working groups on all of the ideas.  Please tell us when you see a draft
recommendation that seems to be right.  Please tell us when you see a draft
recommendation that you think is unreasonable - and tell us what causes
your concern.  Some of the draft recommendations are likely to sound like
good ideas (or even "this is what we do now!") while others will seem to be
pretty radical.  If you see a draft recommendation that you think is really
going "too far", it would be really helpful to hear from you as community
members what you'd consider to be a reasonable alternative, or a middle
ground that you think would be acceptable.

I'm on the Roles & Responsibilities working group, and I am seeing several
recommendations from other groups that I plan to comment upon, too; some of
them seem like really good ideas to me, but there are ones that I don't
really think are a great idea, too.

Risker/Anne


On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 at 12:25, Ziko van Dijk  wrote:

> Am Mo., 12. Aug. 2019 um 17:51 Uhr schrieb Nicole Ebber <
> nicole.eb...@wikimedia.de>:
>
> > Dear all,.
>
>
>
> > As such, constructive
> > feedback and solution-oriented suggestions are welcomed.
>
>
> Hello Nicole,
> For example, if I say that I am against NC and ND content on Commons, would
> such a feedback be welcome? Or would it be dismissed as not "constructive"
> and not "solution-oriented"?
> Maybe you can explain to me what the actual problem is that is supposed to
> be solved by ND and NC content?
> Kind regards
> Ziko
>
>
>
>
>
> > > specific expressions of those ideas certainly can be, but the
> underlying
> > > facts and ideas cannot. If the expression of those ideas is to be on
> > > Wikimedia, they must be under an open content license, allowing reuse
> > > without regard to purpose. If someone would prefer to put their work
> > under
> > > an NC license, then a free-content project is not the appropriate place
> > for
> > > it. Many other places are happy to accept NC-licensed material. But
> even
> > > then, reuse of the concepts and facts cannot be prohibited no matter
> what
> > > one does.
> > >
> > > Todd
> > >
> > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 5:47 AM Philip Kopetzky <
> > philip.kopet...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please don't generalise frustration with your conduct on this list.
> > > You're
> > > > the only one telling people to shut up here.
> > > >
> > > > And just to keep this on track, what is your view on how we can
> > > incorporate
> > > > indigenous knowledge without it becoming commercialised by the
> current
> > > > licensing scheme?
> > > > ___
> > > > 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 mail

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF commitment for a Wikimedia projects archive

[Risker]

Well, I think perhaps Fae's question may be considered more generally.  Fae
is knowledgeable about the structure of the Wikimedia movement as well as
the WMF, and I think it might be best to work from the assumption that
their core question is probably more along the lines of whether (and how)
the current long-term strategy development process will, in fact, make
recommendations that are in line with ensuring that there will be (at
minimum) a publicly accessible archive of the Wikimedia projects.

The movement strategy process is very broad, and  contains a lot of diverse
ideas about how the movement/WMF/chapters/other entities/projects can be
improved, maintained, developed and supported.  I'm pretty deep in the
strategy stuff, and as far as I know, at this point there's no clear path
to maintaining (or dissolving) any of the existing structures; more to the
point, there's no guarantee that the final summary recommendations of the
combined strategy groups will continue to support the current WMF mission
statement - that is, the part that says " [t]he [Wikimedia] Foundation will
make and keep useful information from its projects available on the
internet free of charge, in perpetuity."

I don't think that's really a bad question to ask - in fact, it may be one
of the more important ones.  I hope I am not presuming too much, but I
think Fae is saying that this is something that is really important and
valuable, and that continuity/perpetuation of that particular aspect of the
mission statement should be a recommendation that gets included in the
final reports - regardless of which entity assumes responsibility for it or
who pays for it.

Risker/Anne

On Tue, 14 May 2019 at 18:03, Nathan  wrote:

> The Internet Archive, incidentally, already seems to maintain copies of
> Wikimedia projects. I don't know to what degree of fidelity. Additionally,
> the WMF's core deliverable is already to provide and sustain access to its
> projects. It has an endowment for that purpose already. Other websites and
> media that might have ephemeral access due to their nature as short-term
> tools need the IA to be preserved, but the WMF's projects seem to occupy a
> different space. It's sort of like asking if the Library of Congress needs
> to invest in some external project to preserve and organize its
> collections. No, that is its actual raison d'etre.
> ___
> 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] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

[Risker]

I concur with Phoebe and Philippe as well.  I find this branding proposal
feels very dated; something that might have had currency several years ago,
but not really an advantage in the coming 10-15 years.  There aren't a lot
of organizations that change their names to reflect their most prominent
brand; if one looks at the most recent "big tech" renaming, we saw Google
move to Alphabet, actually divorcing themselves from their keystone brand.
I suspect that, had the foundation originally been named the "Wikipedia
Foundation", we might very well be looking to change the name to something
more generic (like "Wikimedia Foundation") today.  Given the longterm
strategic goal of being a broad and deep knowledge ecostructure, I think a
more generic name serves the movement better.

Much as I very much appreciate the time, energy and other resources that
have led to this proposal, there's not a lot of evidence of "value for
money" in proceeding, especially as a lot of the costs would devolve down
to affiliates that have much more pressing needs to meet with their limited
financial resources.  I won't enter into any discussion about whether
certain of our projects should be left by the wayside, but I will note that
there are significant variations in the "popularity" of various projects
between language groups as well as cultural groups.

Risker/Anne

On Sun, 14 Apr 2019 at 09:28, Philippe Beaudette 
wrote:

> As usual, Phoebe states very eloquently what I've been struggling to put
> into words myself.  And like she, I would have been excited about this
> brand change several years ago.  But we weren't ready / missed / didn't see
> the need for that opportunity then.  I think that moment has passed.  I'm
> not sure that the cost outlay and the time that it will take to clear up
> the confusion that a rebrand will cause is demonstrably worth the value
> received from it, for the reasons that Phoebe lays out below.
>
> Best,
> Philippe
> (former staff, still a volunteer, though of greatly reduced volume)
>
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 9:42 AM phoebe ayers 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Dear all,
> > I haven't weighed in before. But it seems to me there's a simple question
> > underlying all of this: do we actually want, or need, to increase public
> > awareness of the Wikimedia Foundation and Wikimedia chapters/affiliates
> (as
> > opposed to the projects themselves)?
> >
> > Having Wikimedia be a more recognizable entity or brand does not seem to
> me
> > like it would help us in our core goals, of recruiting editors and
> content
> > to the *projects*. We do not typically use the Wikimedia name to do
> > outreach, or to talk about the projects; the handful of us that are
> > insiders and give presentations about the WMF is small, relative to the
> > number of educators and librarians and editors talking about Wikipedia.
> (I
> > give many trainings on editing Wikipedia every year; talking about
> > Wikimedia is irrelevant for this purpose). Perhaps a rebrand would make
> > fundraising easier -- but we already use the project brand for that, as
> > most fundraising is directly off the projects, and the fundraising that
> > isn't (grants and large donations) has a lot of communication around it.
> So
> > I'm not sure how a rebrand would help here either.
> >
> > The premise of this whole exercise is that people knowing about Wikimedia
> > as an entity will somehow help us. But we are not trying to recruit
> > contributors to the Foundation, or to the chapters; we are trying to
> > recruit them to the projects, and if the infrastructure of our network is
> > invisible, I am fine with that. I think to increase the centrality of the
> > *organization* is a distraction that misses the point of both our mission
> > and the role of the organization, which is to provide infrastructure.
> We're
> > not selling shoes here; more brand awareness of the Foundation does not
> > translate into a direct furthering of our mission, and more focus on the
> > organization is at best a distraction for overworked volunteers.
> >
> > Like Andrew, I might have been excited about naming it the Wikipedia
> > Foundation ten or fifteen years ago. But now, I think there is a wide
> world
> > of free knowledge that we want to imagine -- including a future of our
> > projects remixed into something new, beyond Wikipedia. So for that reason
> > too, I am skeptical.
> >
> > regards,
> > Phoebe
> > (former WMF trustee)
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Iberoconf 2019 - Declaration of Santiago regarding affiliates' rights and responsabilities

[Risker]

Thank you very much for bringing this to the attention of the broader
community, Osmar.  I will note that the gist of this statement was recently
discussed by the Roles & Responsibilities Strategy Working Group[1] and we
noted that it reflects and expands upon several points we had found during
our research.  We will take these points into consideration as we develop
our recommendations.

Risker/Anne
(As a member of the R Strategy Working Group)

[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Working_Groups/Roles_%26_Responsibilities

On Thu, 21 Feb 2019 at 20:43, Osmar Valdebenito 
wrote:

> Hello friends,
>
> I would like to share with you the declaration made by most of the
> participants in the last Iberoconf meeting in Santiago, hosted by Wikimedia
> Chile between February 8-10th. The meeting had representatives of 13
> affiliates from Ibero America and Italy, plus Wikimedia Foundation staff
> members, two members of the BoT of the WMF and other guests.
>
> The "Declaration of Santiago" (in Spanish: Carta de Santiago) is a
> statement made by Iberocoop members regarding to rights and
> responsabilities between different affiliates (chapters and user groups)
> and the current rules regarding their formation. The statement is the
> result of the discussion after long formal and informal discussions between
> us.
>
> English:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Iberocoop:Iberoconf_2019/Carta_de_Santiago
> Spanish:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Iberocoop:Iberoconf_2019/Carta_de_Santiago/es
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Osmar Valdebenito G.
> Wikimedia Chile trustee
> Iberoconf 2019 organizer
> ___
> 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] Farewell, Erik!

[Risker]

I wish you a lot of joy in your retirement, Erik.  We will miss you and all
of your work to help us become a more transparent organization.

Risker/Anne

On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 at 05:42, Magnus Manske via Wikimedia-l <
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Erik,
>
> thanks for your great work on stats, and welcome back to the volunteer
> force.
> Where the real work is done :-)
>
> Magnus
>
> On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 10:31 AM Sandra Rientjes - Wikimedia Nederland <
> rient...@wikimedia.nl> wrote:
>
> > Dear Erik,
> >
> > Many thanks for all the help and support you gave Wikimedia Nederland and
> > myself over the past years. Whenever we had tricky stats-related
> questions,
> > we knew we could turn to you.
> >
> > I hope to see you at many WMNL-events in the future.
> >
> > Enjoy the freedom!
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Sandra
> >
> >
> > Sandra Rientjes
> > Directeur/Executive Director Wikimedia Nederland
> >
> > tel.(+31) (0)30 3200238 <+31%2030%20320%200238> (ma, di, do)
> > mob. (+31) (0)6  31786379 <+31%206%2031786379> (wo, vrij)
> >
> > www.wikimedia.nl
> >
> >
> > Mariaplaats 3
> > 3511 LH  Utrecht
> >
> >
> > Op do 7 feb. 2019 om 11:22 schreef rupert THURNER <
> > rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > >:
> >
> > > Many thanks erik and all the best!! One sentence in eriks blog post
> > cited i
> > > found surprising. What type of modesty you guys were talking about?
> > >
> > > "At Wikimania London (2014) I talked about how we should err on the
> side
> > of
> > > modesty. That message never came across. I started to have a discussion
> > on
> > > this within WMF but failed to bring this to fruition. My bad."
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Feb 6, 2019, 22:18 Dario Taraborelli <
> dtarabore...@wikimedia.org
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > “[R]ecent revisions of an article can be peeled off to reveal older
> > > layers,
> > > > which are still meaningful for historians. Even graffiti applied by
> > > vandals
> > > > can by its sheer informality convey meaningful information, just like
> > > > historians learned a lot from graffiti on walls of classic Pompei.
> > > Likewise
> > > > view patterns can tell future historians a lot about what was hot and
> > > what
> > > > wasn’t in our times. Reason why these raw view data are meant to be
> > > > preserved for a long time.”
> > > >
> > > > Erik Zachte wrote these lines in a blog post
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://web.archive.org/web/20171018194720/http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/07/michael-jackson/
> > > > >
> > > > almost
> > > > ten years ago, and I cannot find better words to describe the gift he
> > > gave
> > > > us. Erik retired <http://infodisiac.com/back_to_volunteer_mode.htm>
> > this
> > > > past Friday, leaving behind an immense legacy. I had the honor to
> work
> > > with
> > > > him for several years, and I hosted this morning an intimate, tearful
> > > > celebration of what Erik has represented for the Wikimedia movement.
> > > >
> > > > His Wikistats project <https://stats.wikimedia.org/>—with his
> > signature
> > > > pale yellow background we've known and loved since the mid 2000s
> > > > <
> > https://web.archive.org/web/20060412043240/https://stats.wikimedia.org/
> > > > >—has
> > > > been much more than an "analytics platform". It's been an individual
> > > > attempt he initiated, and grew over time, to try and comprehend and
> > make
> > > > sense of the largest open collaboration project in human history,
> > driven
> > > by
> > > > curiosity and by an insatiable desire to serve data to the
> communities
> > > that
> > > > most needed it.
> > > >
> > > > Through this project, Erik has created a live record of data
> describing
> > > the
> > > > growth and reach of all Wikimedia communities, across languages and
> > > > projects, putting multi-lingualism and smaller communities at the
> very
> > > > center of his attention. He coined metrics such as "active editors"
> > that
> > > > defined the benchmark for volunteers, the Wikimedia Foundat

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Survey about the Foundation's Mission

[Risker]

I regret to say that I feel James has abused this forum once again for his
own personal agenda, much of which is unrelated even indirectly to the WMF
or the Wikimedia movement. Further, I feel that he has done so in a way
that is deceptive to members of this mailing list, and that his actions are
an abuse of the trust of the members of this mailing list.

Generally speaking, I'm pretty tolerant of people bringing different
perspectives and ideas to this mailing list; however, I believe this is a
step too far for someone who has been asked in the past on multiple
occasions to stay on topic.  I am not sure that James needs to remain a
contributor to this list.

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 16 Jan 2019 at 11:56, James Salsman  wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 1:23 AM Kevin Payravi 
> wrote:
> >
> > I've heard confusion from a couple folks and want to make sure it's clear
> > here that this survey is coming from you as an individual, Jim, and has
> no
> > origination or coordination with the Foundation - correct?
>
> Yes, the survey is just from me, not the Foundation. I'm trying to
> encourage the Executive Director to bring back the "Letter to Donors"
> which was discontinued for reasons unknown, but not the explanation
> given to me at the time, that it was forbidden by law:
>
> https://twitter.com/jsalsman/status/998272655995240449
> https://twitter.com/SuePGardner/status/998302792946102273
>
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 3:44 AM Dan Garry (Deskana) 
> wrote:
> >
> >... (free healthcare, universal basic income, etc.) have very little to
> > do with the Foundation's mission.
>
> That is precisely the matter of opinion which the survey measures. The
> idea that the abundance of contributors would not increase under the
> proposals is clearly not shared by most, and whether that means
> contributors would therefore be "empowered" by them is subjective.
>
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019, 8:21 PM James Salsman  >
> > > Happy 18th birthday to Wikipedia!
> > >
> > > What does it mean for the Wikimedia Foundation to empower
> > > contributors? Please share your opinion of what the Wikimedia
> > > Foundation's mission statement means when it describes empowering
> > > people to collect and develop educational content:
> > >
> > > http://bit.ly/wikimission
> > >
> > > The survey results are summarized after form submission.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Jim Salsman
>
> ___
> 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] Hiding versions because of copyright violation

[Risker]

Hi Lodewijk -

I don't think you're mis-translating; I think that there's just a different
understanding of the terms between projects.  Most other projects didn't
get saddled with the extensions that used the actual term "hiding" that
English Wikipedia had, so wouldn't have had a reason to use the more
precise terminology that is used there.

It appears that when you are speaking of "hiding", you are referring to
revision-deletion.  From that perspective, revision-deletion or page
deletion is used on English Wikipedia for almost all copyright violations.
The enwiki policy is here:  <
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#Criteria_for_redaction>


Risker/Anne

On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 13:20, effe iets anders 
wrote:

> Thanks for those questions.
>
> Just as clarification, I'm talking about hiding revisions with the effect
> that the revisions are greyed out in the history, but that admins can still
> see their content. But I realize that oversight policies (the effect of
> oversight is stronger) may be more prominent, and that perhaps the
> ecosystem of different options should be considered in such a question :) .
>
> Thanks Anne for clarifying terminology - I am mostly aware with the
> terminology we use in Dutch, so may mistranslate some things.
>
> Lodewijk
>
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 10:13 AM Risker  wrote:
>
>> I think one of the issues here is that we are not all using the same
>> terminology.
>>
>> "Hiding", on English Wikipedia, is generally reserved for some weird
>> extensions that had to have special features built in because
>> revision-deletion, deletion, and suppression did not work with them.  I
>> think all of those extensions are now disabled on English Wikipedia.
>>
>> "Revision-deletion" (which has the effect of removing a revision from the
>> view of the reading public and users who are not administrators or
>> equivalent) or complete page deletion is used for most copyright violations
>> on English Wikipedia.  Copyright violations should not be publicly
>> available, since it does not meet even the most basic requirements of edits
>> to the project; I have a hard time seeing why any project would leave them
>> in the page history, since that is the equivalent of leaving them in the
>> project.
>>
>> "Suppression" is an even higher-level form of revision-deletion that
>> removes the revision from the view of everyone except oversighters.  It
>> replaced the old "oversight" extension in 2009, and it is my understanding
>> that all of the revisions that were historically removed using the
>> oversight tool have now been returned to page history and suppressed.
>> (There are some exceptions.) Suppression is used on English Wikipedia for
>> most personal information, which can include anything listed in the WMF
>> privacy policy.
>>
>> There are variations in the use of the deletion/suppression tools: for
>> example, since 2009 we have been able to either "delete" or "suppress"
>> usernames and edit summaries that are highly inappropriate. The ability to
>> "suppress" usernames is sometimes used when someone edits while logged out,
>> not realizing their IP address will appear in the history.
>>
>> I suspect that English Wikipedia has lower thresholds for both
>> revision-deletion and suppression because it has historically been the
>> project that is most abused, sometimes in ways that I'd be hesitant to
>> publicly describe.
>>
>>
>> Risker/Anne
>> (English Wikipedia oversighter)
>>
>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 12:29, effe iets anders 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> This is one of these things that seems particularly hard to find, so I'd
>>> like to pick your collective brains on this:
>>>
>>> What are the various policies across our little universe on using the
>>> 'hide
>>> version' functionality to hide historical versions of articles? I would
>>> especially appreciate it if you could elaborate a bit on how it's used in
>>> practice with regards to privacy violations (what is the threshold of
>>> private information that would justify hiding versions) and copyright
>>> violations (when do you actually hide the versions, rather than just
>>> remove
>>> it from the current version and leave it in the history).
>>>
>>> Are there any global policies on this? I think not, but always better to
>>> double check :).
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Lodewijk
>>> ___

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Hiding versions because of copyright violation

[Risker]

I think one of the issues here is that we are not all using the same
terminology.

"Hiding", on English Wikipedia, is generally reserved for some weird
extensions that had to have special features built in because
revision-deletion, deletion, and suppression did not work with them.  I
think all of those extensions are now disabled on English Wikipedia.

"Revision-deletion" (which has the effect of removing a revision from the
view of the reading public and users who are not administrators or
equivalent) or complete page deletion is used for most copyright violations
on English Wikipedia.  Copyright violations should not be publicly
available, since it does not meet even the most basic requirements of edits
to the project; I have a hard time seeing why any project would leave them
in the page history, since that is the equivalent of leaving them in the
project.

"Suppression" is an even higher-level form of revision-deletion that
removes the revision from the view of everyone except oversighters.  It
replaced the old "oversight" extension in 2009, and it is my understanding
that all of the revisions that were historically removed using the
oversight tool have now been returned to page history and suppressed.
(There are some exceptions.) Suppression is used on English Wikipedia for
most personal information, which can include anything listed in the WMF
privacy policy.

There are variations in the use of the deletion/suppression tools: for
example, since 2009 we have been able to either "delete" or "suppress"
usernames and edit summaries that are highly inappropriate. The ability to
"suppress" usernames is sometimes used when someone edits while logged out,
not realizing their IP address will appear in the history.

I suspect that English Wikipedia has lower thresholds for both
revision-deletion and suppression because it has historically been the
project that is most abused, sometimes in ways that I'd be hesitant to
publicly describe.


Risker/Anne
(English Wikipedia oversighter)

On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 12:29, effe iets anders 
wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> This is one of these things that seems particularly hard to find, so I'd
> like to pick your collective brains on this:
>
> What are the various policies across our little universe on using the 'hide
> version' functionality to hide historical versions of articles? I would
> especially appreciate it if you could elaborate a bit on how it's used in
> practice with regards to privacy violations (what is the threshold of
> private information that would justify hiding versions) and copyright
> violations (when do you actually hide the versions, rather than just remove
> it from the current version and leave it in the history).
>
> Are there any global policies on this? I think not, but always better to
> double check :).
>
> Best,
> Lodewijk
> ___
> 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] America may go bizarro, but Wikipedia has a choice to make

[Risker]

Without in any way suggesting that David's and Fae's question is
inappropriateI suspect that the people most likely to have used/tested
the backups are not people who follow this list; they're much more likely
to participate on technical lists.

It's actually a pretty good question, and Ariel Glenn of the WMF may be the
best person to ask since they seem to be managing the process of making the
files available.

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 06:44, Fæ  wrote:

> Location: This is a tangent, one that has been raised before as a
> /non-answer/ to the issue of actually getting on with contingency
> planning. Realistically I would start by looking at the potential
> matches of Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands (where servers already
> are used for WMF operations), or lastly and for very different
> reasons, Peru.
>
> What I find weird, or bizarro, is that the responses so far are vague
> dismissals for non-good fantastic reasons, at the level of "let magic
> blockchain technology solve it for free", rather than taking on board
> that preparing a hot switch for Wikimedia operations in a welcoming
> host country, is a highly cost effective disaster contingency plan,
> whether due to natural disasters in San Fran / Florida / Amsterdam, or
> due to national government using its legal authority to freeze, switch
> off or tamper with content due to politically inflated "security" or
> "emergency" issues. The risks are real and predictable, and as a
> globally recognized charity with plenty of money in the bank, the WMF
> should have contingency plans to ensure its continued existence, as
> any professional business actuary would advise.
>
> As a past IT auditor, what also made the hairs prick up on the back of
> my neck, was David Gerard's sensible question "So ... when did someone
> last test putting up a copy of the sites from
> the backups" - Could someone give a real answer to that please? If
> it's never, then wow, we all have to ask some hard questions of the
> WMF Board of exactly how they hold senior management to account.
>
> Thanks,
> Fae
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 23:05, Nathan  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Fae,
> >
> > I'm curious what nation you have in mind for your stable Plan B. Is it
> > Brexit Britain? France of the Yellow Vests and Front National? Perhaps
> > Orban's Hungary, Putin's Russia, or Germany with its recent right-wing
> > resurgence?
> >
> > Maybe you'd prefer Jair Bolsonaro's Brazil? I suppose in Italy we'd worry
> > about Beppe and criminal libel statutes, while BJP would hardly seem
> > welcoming in India and I can't imagine you'd suggest a home on the other
> > side of the Great Firewall.
> >
> > Maybe you're hinting at Canada, but otherwise, I'd love to understand
> what
> > island of liberal stability and legal safeguards you think is safe from
> the
> > vagaries of electoral politics or rigid authoritarianism.
> >
> > The countries I list above have their own flaws (although in each case, I
> > believe, many desirable traits as well) as does any other alternative.
> > Anyone could reasonably argue it's unfair to stigmatize any of them by
> > glaringly public flaws.
> >
> > To my mind Steve Walling has it right - the very nature of Wikipedia is
> > maybe the best protection there could be, even against the absurdly
> > unlikely circumstance of a United States government takeover of
> Wikipedia.
> >
> > Nathan
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:17 PM Fæ  wrote:
> >
> > > Dear fellow Wikimedians, please sit back for a moment and ponder the
> > > following,
> > >
> > > For those of us not resident in the US, it has been genuinely alarming
> > > to see highly respected US government archives vanish overnight,
> > > reference websites go down, and US legislation appear to drift to
> > > whatever commercial interests have the loudest current political
> > > voices. Sadly "populism" is happening now, and dominates American
> > > politics, driving changes of all sorts in response to politically
> > > inflated and vague rhetoric about "security" and "fakenews". It is not
> > > inconceivable that a popularist current or future US Government could
> > > decide to introduce emergency controls over websites like Wikipedia,
> > > virtually overnight.[1][2][3][4]
> > >
> > > The question of whether the Wikimedia Foundation should have a hot
> > > switch option, so that if a "disaster" strikes in America, we could
> &

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Blocks which appear to demonstrate prejudice against minorities

[Risker]

 I note that we are talking about the block of one single user on one
single project; this particular account has thousands of edits over about a
dozen projects, but is "attached" to hundreds of Wikimedia projects.  The
majority of these "attached" accounts are likely because the editor
"visited" the various projects while logged in, activating the automatic
account creation algorithm.  The account was created 8 years ago, and has
actively edited a wide variety of  projects, including several wikipedias,
Commons, Wikidata, and Meta. While English Wikipedia is the account's
"home" wiki, about 55% of the account's global edits have been made on
Marathi Wikipedia. The Amharic Wikipedia account does not appear to have
edited, which suggests that it was automatically created when the editor
was "looking at" the project on 9  February 2018.  The block for account
name was made on 22 October 2018.  I note that accounts were created on
over a hundred projects over the course of a few days in February 2018.

The point being raised in this thread is that it appears this editor was
blocked on one of the 381 wikis on which they have an account, explicitly
because of the perception that their username calls attention to the sexual
behaviour of the editor. What we do not know is (a) whether that is in fact
a legitimate username block reason on Amharic Wikipedia, or (b) if it is a
legitimate username block reason, *why* it would be a username block
reason. We don't know why this block was applied so long after the account
was created. We don't know the username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, nor do
we know how it is applied; for example, we don't know if a username like
"StraightGuy101" would be blocked.  We do know that there are only 4
administrators on Amharic Wikipedia, and that there are fewer than 50
active users working on the project, which may be part of the reason for
the delay between automatic account creation and the account block.

We also know that one of the challenges of single user login for all
Wikimedia projects has highlighted the fact that certain usernames that are
acceptable on some projects are blocked on other projects; we've known that
for years. We know that each project establishes its own policies when it
comes to usernames. There are legitimate reasons why a username that is
acceptable in one language is not acceptable in another language, even in
cases where the editor had no knowledge that the chosen username would be a
problem in another language. We do know that there have been lots of cases
where usernames have been blocked for "username policy violation" on all
kinds of projects, despite the account operating productively on other
projects.

I also note that there is nothing in this thread that confirms the editor
themself has raised any concerns about this block, and I am always wary of
turning an editor into a "martyr for a cause" without their direct
agreement, as that can be as abusive as the original action. So the first
step in this situation would be to confirm with the individual editor
whether or not they want their "case" to be examined.

Should the editor be agreeable, I suggest that the next step is for someone
who has the ability to converse in Amharic to contact the Amharic Wikipedia
and find out why the block has been issued, how it is consistent with the
username policy on Amharic Wikipedia, whether that policy is driven in part
by external considerations (e.g., does the project risk heavy governmental
scrutiny if it appears to "promote" locally unacceptable activities). I am
personally curious as to why it took over six months to identify that this
account did not meet the local username policy, and whether there was
internal or external discussion about the username.

It is not clear to me what the desired outcome is in this case - at least
in part because we have no idea of the opinion of the editor involved.  I
am hard-pressed to say that a project should be required to allow usernames
that it has a long history of considering unacceptable, especially if it is
applied evenly to all accounts; in this case, if it disallows usernames
that imply sexual preference regardless of what that preference is.

It seems to me that the WMF Trust & Safety group would probably be the
right group to examine this.

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 at 09:42, Ariel Glenn WMF  wrote:

> Additional notes:
> The user's regular page can be viewed on en wikipedia:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:QueerEcofeminist
> Queer may have to do with gender identity as opposed to being an indicator
> of 'sexual behavior', so the blockers didn't even get that right. Example:
> I am gender-nonconforming as to my gender identity and expression; this is
> the primary reason I use the label 'queer'.
>
> I believe this should be reported... somewhere. But I don't know wher

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Page views of male/female biographies?

[Risker]

Hmm.  I think the subject of what you call "audience bias" is far more
general than the tiny targeted area you're talking about.  I'm pretty sure
that readers from Poland are thousands of times more likely to access the
Wikipedia article about [name any town in Poland] than readers in Indonesia
are.  I'm pretty sure that readers from all over the world are far more
likely to access articles about people who are named in other publications,
particularly the news media, than they are about notable but comparatively
obscure article subjects who haven't recently been the subject of public
interest.  I do not think you have made a good case for considering the
viewing of articles of male subjects vs. female subjects to be directly
linked to "audience bias".  We only need to look at the top100 articles
viewed on any project to see that what drives page views is usually some
event external to the Wikipedia projects.

Page view data is pretty readily available - it is available for every
single page on every single Wikipedia (and probably for a lot of other
projects too, I've just never checked).  It would require some technical
knowledge to write a script targeting page view information for articles in
selected categories - such as page views of articles about women scientists
- provided there is correct and appropriate categorization of the article.
I'm the first to admit I'm incapable of writing such a script, but there
are lots of Wikimedians who have such skills.

It certainly looks like you are asking for ongoing research to be carried
out on a topic that interests you (and, I am certain, a lot of other
Wikimedians). I am unclear what this kind of metric would tell us about
"audience bias" (or any other kind of bias, for that matter), but there may
be value in better understanding the frequency of viewing of articles in
certain categories and comparing them to related categories; for example,
comparing the frequency of viewing of the average article about a female
architect as compared to a male architect.  It should be noted that there
is also an inherent bias in that there are far fewer biographical articles
about women in most categories, as compared to men.

Risker/Anne

On Wed, 5 Dec 2018 at 18:20, David Cuenca Tudela  wrote:

> Hi Tilman,
>
> I disagree with your appraisal that there are better venues for my
> question. The gendergap mailing list is technically dead, before your
> message the last one was from April. The other mailing list is related to
> research, not to stats that should be readily available.
>
> From your answer (and the lack of more information) I understand that there
> is a poor (inexistent?) tracking of audience bias. In my opinion these data
> would be very useful to monitor how visitors evolve with more availability
> of women's biographies. I have requested it to be added to the Metrics Kit.
> If anyone else wants to endorse or comment:
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Community_health_initiative/Metrics_kit#Gender_bias_of_audience
>
> Regards,
> Micru
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:22 AM Tilman Bayer  wrote:
>
> > Hi Micru,
> >
> > in general, there may be better venues to ask this kind of question, e.g.
> > the Wiki-research-l and Gendergap mailing lists (both CCed). But for a
> > partial answer, the paper by Marit Hinnosaar reviewed here looks at these
> > stats (if not their long-term trend):
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter/2015/December#Does_advertising_the_gender_gap_help_or_hurt_Wikipedia
> > ?
> >
> > E.g. "On a typical (median) day in September 2014, no one read 26 percent
> > of the biographies of men versus only 16 percent of the biographies of
> > women."
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 3:35 AM David Cuenca Tudela 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Are there any statistics that track the evolution of page views of
> > > male/female biographies in the different Wikipedias?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > 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,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Tilman Bayer
> > Senior Analyst
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> > IRC (Freenode): HaeB
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How can we fix the two-stage page loading problem?

[Risker]

Just noting in passing that ascribing this to the gadgets that make up a
personal profile...isn't always what is the problem.  I don't think
standard non-logged-in profile has any of these finicky bits, yet the same
thing happens to users who are not logged in.  All the time - half the time
I find out about an overarching banner, it's from someone who knows I "do"
Wikipedia, and they're complaining to me. I have to disabuse them of the
idea that any editor is likely to be able to change this...

Risker/Anne

On 3 September 2017 at 13:44, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> These issues can be fixed. Have the banners load below the buttons we
> typically click on. Move the gadgets to the left of "read" rather than to
> the right of "view history". I have proposed this for TW as I mentioned
> here
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Twinkle#Button_load_issues
>
> J
>
> On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 11:01 AM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On 2 September 2017 at 02:09, Michael Peel <em...@mikepeel.net> wrote:
> >
> > > This is possibly the most annoying feature of the Wikimedia projects at
> > the moment. You access a page. Then you start reading or editing it. And
> > then suddenly the page jumps when a fundraising banner / central notice /
> > gadget / beta feature loads. So you have to start reading the page again,
> > or you have to find where you were editing again, or you have to undo the
> > change you just made since you made it in the wrong part of the page.
> >
> >
> > Or you click "edit" and it hits the banner that suddenly popped up
> > under your click. 
> >
> >
> > - d.
> >
> > ___
> > 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
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> ___
> 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] New style banner - A heads up

[Risker]

I think they continue to display the absolutely most irritating behaviour
of the old banners, which is the several second delay between the screen
that shows the content, and the overlaid banner that in the "old" baner
covers the content someone has already started reading and in the "new"
banner pushes down the content almost a full screen length and makes the
reader lose his or her place.  Frankly, I don't think whether or not the
"banner" looks like content is as much an issue as getting the banner to
show up at the same time as the page content.  I've been told, without
attribution, that this is intentional in order to really draw attention to
the banners, and I periodically see it on other websites as well. My
personal response is always the same: close the overlaying window and avoid
returning to the website if I can.

Of the two, though, I prefer the banner that pushes down the content over
the one that covers it because I could still navigate through the article.
(For the record, I am on a fast computer and using the highest speed
internet available for residential use in Canada - and the second banner
managed to still freeze my computer.)

Risker/Anne

On 23 August 2017 at 22:53, Robert Fernandez <wikigamal...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is anyone actually confusing the banner with article content, or are they
> just assuming others will do so?
> ___
> 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] Let's set up a Tor onion service for Wikipedia

[Risker]

I see your point, Gergo, but in reality Phabricator is an even worse
channel to discuss projects that are, essentially, social issues.  Whether
or not to have an onion may appear to be essentially a technical issue, but
I have yet to see any indication in numerous discussions about Tor that I
have read and/or participated in that our technical geniuses (and I say
that with warmth and honesty) really give a lot of thought to the legal and
social implications of providing active support to the dark web.  It is a
social and ethical issue (from just about all sides) and should be
discussed with that in mind.

I have little doubt that it is entirely technically possible to set up a
Tor onion on an isolated WMF server somewhere or other.  It's probably
child's play for many who work within the area, and I have little doubt
that there are many individuals within the broad Wikimedia community who
have chosen to use or actively support Tor.  Setting this up is not a
technical "problem" to be solved (which is essentially what Phabricator is
for). I will again reinforce: it's a social and ethical issue, and only
once that is resolved would it be time to consider it a "technical
problem".

With respect to "known editors" using Tor, I'll take the opportunity to
also respond to Lane. I think I could paraphrase his concerns by saying
that, from where he sits, it seems that all Tor users are painted with the
same brush, and that there are some legitimate users of Tor, and some
legitimate reasons that certain individuals would potentially benefit from
using Tor.  I happen to agree with him on this point.  I am well aware of
at least half a dozen Tor users known to the enwiki community who
explicitly requested IPBE on their existing accounts so that they could
edit; the accounts tended not to have many edits, but the editors'
rationales were usually that they were Tor users and thus were unable to
edit. I'm aware that several of those individuals have been granted IPBE
over time; yes, they have to ask for it, but then so do the users who want
to edit through hard-blocked VPNs.  I can't speak for other projects, but I
can say that on enwiki there are both administrators and functionaries who
are liberal in their granting of IPBE. I sometimes find it odd that nobody
asks me directly to help them out; I think I've granted it every time I was
asked.


Risker/Anne



On 13 June 2017 at 06:28, Gergő Tisza <gti...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Now that we have ascertained (again) that wikimedia-l is a ​poor channel
> for focused discussions about tech proposals, can we move this to
> Phabricator?
> ___
> 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] Let's set up a Tor onion service for Wikipedia

[Risker]

As far as I can tell (and from comments made in the past by actual Tor
users), there is no problem whatsoever for Tor users to read Wikipedia
while using Tor.  Editing is a completely different situation - and well it
should be, given the pure unadulterated trash that tends to come in
whenever a Tor exit node is missed in the routine lockdowns.

I recognize the concerns about ISP tracking and what I assume most
Wikimedians would consider inappropriate use of their browsing
information.  I understand why more and more Wikimedians are electing to
use VPNs and other more secure methods of accessing the internet.  But VPNs
are also heavily abused - not just by socks, but by individuals who
consciously and intentionally disrupt projects - and thus more and more of
them are getting locked in "only accounts can edit" or even "only IPBE can
edit" mode - often on a global basis, not just one individual wiki.  It
occurs to me that we can probably be more liberal in handing out IPBE -
which covers both Tor users and VPN users.  It's not an idea situation,
since people have to establish their account history before anyone's going
to hand them IPBE, but it is probably better than nothing.  And yes, the
place to ask is at Global IPBE, because getting IPBE on only one project is
unhelpful if one also pitches in elsewhere (Wikidata, Commons, etc.).

Risker/Anne

On 5 June 2017 at 19:34, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote:

> Cristian Consonni wrote:
> >I have read several discussions on the topic (going back to 2006) and
> >what I have understood from those is that the biggest issue with editing
> >via Tor is sockpuppeting.
>
> This Phabricator comment you found seems pretty useful:
> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T71333#728636>.
>
> And Faidon posted in November 2014 about the establishment of a Tor relay:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2014-November/079392.html
>
> How does your proposal interact (if at all) with the existing Tor relay
> set up in late 2014?
>
> It's unclear to me whether "Tor onion service" in this context is
> equivalent to a Tor exit node. I'm fairly sure setting up the latter has
> been discussed previously on wikimedia-l and/or wikitech-l.
>
> MZMcBride
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Chief Communications Officer search & job description

[Risker]

Pine -

I am hardly the best informed person, but even I know that Communications
handles the Blog, the twitter feed, the Facebook feed, provides support to
the Board, executive and C-levels for communication, and handles thousands
of media requests a year. In other words, you're missing about 90% of your
workload in your description.  They also assist other departments with
communication, both internal and external.

Your point #1, with respect to improving internal communication, is
primarily handled by other departments within the WMF (Learning, Human
Resources), with Communications as a resource rather than the primary
messager.  Your point #2 is pretty much irrelevant; some of the best
communications leaders work for political campaigns, and they're usually
"hired guns" rather than true believers.  There are a few exceptions, but
again, it's irrelevant, and not ethical to screen directly for political
affiliation - and possibly illegal to do so.

Risker/Anne

On 27 May 2017 at 23:53, Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Joady,
>
> Thank you for publishing this. Overall I like this draft. I would like to
> offer two comments.
>
> 1. My impression is that WMF Communications is largely used to support
> fundraising, readership, and sometimes legal or advocacy topics. The
> department seems to be externally focused. I would like to see work by WMF
> Communications and/or WMF Community Engagement on developing a systematic
> "internal" communications system among content contributors and WMF
> departments. There are currently many internal communications flows, and
> while I think that there have been some noticeable improvements over the
> past few years (I particularly want to acknowledge the WMF Community
> Liaisons), there is a long way to go in systematizing and optimizing these
> communications flows. So instead of looking for a chief communications
> officer whose main strength is in marketing, sales, PR, or other forms of
> external communication, I would encourage WMF to seek a chief
> communications officer who has a track record of facilitating long-term
> improvement of internal communications in complex and diverse environments.
>
> 2. For the line in the JD draft which currently reads "A clear, effective
> communications style, including experience guiding messaging for major
> organizations, political candidates, or movements", I would encourage
> considerable caution about hiring someone into this role who has had a
> background in political campaigns. I would prefer that the individual have
> no affiliation with any political party. I can think of some organizations
> which are not aligned with a specific political party and which support
> civil rights issues which are likely to be largely compatible with WMF's
> mission, but I would still be very cautious about hiring someone who has
> any background in politics. Keeping in mind WMF's recent and controversial
> annual report, I think it is particularly important to hire a chief
> communications officer who can guide communications and the WMF
> organization away from involvement in political matters to the maximum
> extent possible while still supporting freedom of expression in the limited
> circumstances in which constraints on freedom of expression would impede
> Wikimedians' ability to communicate freely about matters of important
> public interest.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Pine
> ___
> 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] Funds Dissemination Committee Recommendations - Round 2 of 2016-17

[Risker]

On 16 May 2017 at 11:52, rupert THURNER <rupert.thur...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Why the amount is missing for the WMF?
>
> Rupert
>
>
>
Hello Rupert -

The Funds Dissemination Committee is not tasked with recommending funding
for the Wikimedia Foundation; the committee only reviews and provides
feedback on the draft annual plan.

Risker/Anne
___
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>