Thanks Sue.
I think there are ways WiRs could add valuable content directly such as doing
mass uploads of archived documents to Commons, or add article content as
happened here. However I don't think it's a good idea for WMF to involve itself
so much with content generation, and the manner
Hoi,
Money entrusted to a chapter is for that chapter to spend as they see fit.
The notion that it is money from the public is not a license for everyone
to meddle. There are people and places where such scrutiny is best
expressed. When questions are asked, let them be questions and not implicit
Thankyou from me as well, it's refreshing to see such a candid summary of
the failings that occurred in this case, and to see the Foundation taking
responsibility for those. I hope that the opportunity can be taken for all
of us to learn from this so that it does not happen with future projects.
Hi Sue,
Thank you for your report at
https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedian_in_Residence/Harvard_University_assessment.
Could you please clarify if In the future, the Wikimedia Foundation
will not support or endorse the creation of paid roles that have
article writing as a core focus,
On 04/01/2014 07:43 AM, Fæ wrote:
I find it disappointing that when difficult governance questions like
this are raised in public, that some leading members of our community
default to treating the concerned whistle-blower as a troll
I think, Fæ, that you will find that it's not the subject
On 1 April 2014 14:23, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
...
That analysis and examination of that bad move would have been done just
and quickly and effectively by polite inquiry than it would have with
shrill cries.
We're an extraordinarily transparent movement; we don't need
On 04/01/2014 09:34 AM, Fæ wrote:
I am sure than the viewpoint is different for employees within the WMF
like yourself, compared to unpaid volunteers outside, like me. This
may be part of the reason we see this governance failure in a
different light.
That's actually amusingly wrong, though I
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 5:23 AM, Sue Gardner sgard...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 21 March 2014 13:23, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
We will update the wiki page at
https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipedian_in_Residence/Harvard_University_assessment
with more information and
As far as I am concerned, what was wrong with this situation wasn't that
the Wikimedia Foundation paid a trained academic to edit Wikipedia. I
venture that most donors and members of the general public wouldn't have a
problem with that at all.
What was wrong?
1. The obvious appearance of
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
* The Stanton Foundation does not have a financial interest in these
topics. With that said, Liz Allison, who heads the Stanton Foundation,
and Graham Allison, who heads the Belfer Center, are wife and husband,
and the
Good points.
Peter
- Original Message -
From: Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com
To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2014 4:47 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Timothy Sandole and (apparently) $53,690 of WMF
funding
As far as I am
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Martijn Hoekstra
martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
Did the fundraising department regard it as their programme
No, on the contrary, fundraising actively looped in other staff. Folks
like Siko and Asaf were involved early on. That's how the advice to
not turn this
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 7:47 AM, Andreas Kolbe jayen...@gmail.com wrote:
I have no problem *at all* with the
fact that the Wikimedia Foundation paid an academically qualified expert to
make edits to Wikipedia. In fact, I find it disheartening that the
Foundation now feels it has to state that
I am glad that 1,5 weeks before the conference, there is finally some
activity showing up on the lists and the meta pages. I must admit that
I would have really loved to see more engagement on topics like
conference goals and themes, support for the programme team regarding
programme decisions,
Erik
A quick question: was the legal department involved in this debacle prior
to it becoming known?
I'm just curious as to why Geoff Brigham was involved in the production of
Sue's assessment. Was it because Legal was involved, or was he simply
vetting what is already being called a candid
Marc
On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote:
I have *zero* to do with Governance, no stake in that project, and I
don't even actually interact with any of the involved departments. I
can tell you with absolute certainty that my comments on this thread
The WMNL monthly report for February is available on Meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/Reports/Wikimedia_Nederland/201402
It is also included as plain text below.
*COMMUNITY: supporting and mobilising volunteers and editors*[
- ·*Education Extension*.
The
Hello All:
I have been following this thread with great interest and a kind of deeply
appreciative fascination.
First to say that I am relatively new to WMF - having been on board for
just a bit over a year. Previously the jobs that I had pretty much covered
the entire waterfront:
Summer jobs
Nicely put!
On 1 Apr 2014 22:29, Amy Vossbrinck avossbri...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hello All:
I have been following this thread with great interest and a kind of deeply
appreciative fascination.
First to say that I am relatively new to WMF - having been on board for
just a bit over a year.
Sorry Nicole, but I'm unhappy with your answer. You are right, engagement
on other topics is needed, but this is not means people don't have the
right to ask questions and raise concerns.
We didn't have this discussions last year, as none of the chapter sent more
then 2+1. There were few people
The minutes and slides from Friday's quarterly review meeting of the
Parsoid team are now available at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Metrics_and_activities_meetings/Quarterly_reviews/Parsoid/March_2014
.
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Minutes and
Congratulations Anna!
Looking forward to work with you.
Cheers,
Mile Kiš
Vikimedija Srbije - rs.wikimedia.org -
00381 (0)60 7 454 772
Zamislite svet u kome svaka osoba ima slobodan pristup celokupnom ljudskom
znanju. To je ono na čemu mi radimo.
2014-04-02 1:26 GMT+02:00 Rodney Dunican
Congratulations Anna Koval!
Nurunnaby Chowdhury
User: nhasive
Member, IEG committee
Sysop, Bengali Wikipedia
On Wed, Apr 2, 2014 at 5:31 AM, Mile Kiš mil...@vikimedija.org wrote:
Congratulations Anna!
Looking forward to work with you.
Cheers,
Mile Kiš
Vikimedija Srbije -
23 matches
Mail list logo
