If you want an overview of the brand project I recently made an interview
with Zack McCune at WMF about it.
You can find it on Wikimedia Commons:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WP_74_-_right_on_brand.mp3
or, if you prefer regular podcast players, here:
Hoi,
I totally agree that it is about community.. There are some 200 Wikipedia
communities, there is Commons, Wikisource and the community I am most
involved in Wikidata. What ties it together is the organisation of it all.
THAT is Wikimedia for me, both the org and the movement.
Thanks,
Thanks Pine, +1, in particular for this sentence, which goes beyond the
legal status of the brand name: "I think that the Wikipedia brand is, in a
way, the brand of the community. WMF is the steward of the brand, and
should not use the brand in ways which the community has not authorized by
Hello,
I have waited to return to this thread until I could clear enough
space in my mind to try to address it thoroughly. Apologies for the
delay. I will try to address multiple topics in one email.
I think that the Wikipedia brand is, in a way, the brand of the
community. WMF is the steward of
Just want to reinforce some other comments -- Pine... WMF employees, many
of whom gave up subscribing to this list long ago, are real people and this
is their livelihood.
Suggestions to start firing people add no value to the discussion and, if
anything, detract from the credibility of the other
...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Mike Peel
Sent: 20 January 2020 00:29
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Snøhetta and Wikimedia
This meta RfC might be of interest:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia
Gracias,
Mike
Thanks for the heads-up, Mike,
P
-Original Message-
From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of
Mike Peel
Sent: 20 January 2020 00:29
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Snøhetta and Wikimedia
This meta RfC might be of interest
This meta RfC might be of interest:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Should_the_Foundation_call_itself_Wikipedia
Gracias,
Mike
> On 19 Jan 2020, at 08:54:12, geni wrote:
>
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 00:50, Pine W wrote:
>>
>> There are ways that Wikimedia rebranding
On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 00:50, Pine W wrote:
>
> There are ways that Wikimedia rebranding consultations could be done
> collaboratively, politely, and with careful stewardship of donor's money.
> This is not one of them.
Eh questionable. The community is difficult to engage at the best of
times
Forwarding from a PC as simple text:
18.01.2020, 23:48, "Фархад Фаткуллин / Farhad Fatkullin" :
> As one of the participants at Oslo workshops (two groups of Wikimedia
> movement participants took part in on-site hands-on exercises on Jan.14-15 &
> 15-16), I would say both statements are
Interesting to see -- thanks for the pointer John!
I like what I've seen of Snøhetta + their work, would love to hear more.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 1:56 PM John Erling Blad wrote:
> … and people immediately went ballistic. Calm down and discuss the topic!
>
> The news reporting seems to be that
… and people immediately went ballistic. Calm down and discuss the topic!
The news reporting seems to be that Snøhetta has been awarded a full
design project, while the page at Meta says it should act as some form
of facilitator. It could be interesting to know what is correct, as
these two
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 4:50 PM Pine W wrote:
>
> > I think that it's time for some people in WMF to move on. Without having
> > access to WMF internal discussions
So what you're saying is that you don't have lots of information on how
it's decided [1] but you still feel informed enough to at
Earthfire and rustbuckets, can we please stop calling for people to be
fired for doing their job, especially right after admitting that there is
obviously more going on that we don't know about yet. No one's going to
"start replacing employees" based on mailing list messages, so this kind of
There are ways that Wikimedia rebranding consultations could be done
collaboratively, politely, and with careful stewardship of donor's money.
This is not one of them.
I think that it's time for some people in WMF to move on. Without having
access to WMF internal discussions, I don't know exactly
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 at 23:04, John Erling Blad wrote:
>
> This is out in several newspapers now.
>
> "Snøhetta shall create new visual profile for Wikipedia-owner"
This edit made 10 January 2020, is relevant:
Domain Registered on: 2020-01-02
Linked Wiki page is still getting edits:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communications/Wikimedia_brands/2030_movement_brand_project=history
On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 at 09:36, Pine W wrote:
>
> Umm.
>
> Looking at https://brandingwikipedia.org/, I
Umm.
Looking at https://brandingwikipedia.org/, I wonder if this refers to WMF's
ill-fated effort to rebrand Wikimedia as Wikipedia that I hope has been
abandoned. I hope that WMF did not, without consulting the community or
even having the courtesy to notify us, decide to launch another
Note that "Dagens næringsliv" printed the story Thursday, so they must
have had information about it before WMF left the meeting with
Snøhetta. This is no longer a breaking story.
On Sat, Jan 18, 2020 at 12:04 AM John Erling Blad wrote:
>
> This is out in several newspapers now.
>
> "Snøhetta
19 matches
Mail list logo
