Re: [Wikimedia-l] How Wikimedia could help languages to survive

2014-04-27 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Seb35, 26/04/2014 14:11: invent neologisms and terminology The five pillars have only been codified to a degree on global level, so one may care or not, but this would clearly be original research. And I say so as someone whose first edit in 2005 added some neologisms to Wiktionary; again,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] How Wikimedia could help languages to survive

2014-04-27 Thread Milos Rancic
Here are some bad and some good news... The bad news is that I've finally realized why I needed a separate wiki for data. It's about restrictive Ethnologue's ToS [1]. In other words, I could say to myself just: Welcome back to the wonderful world of licenses! So, I've created a private wiki with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
it is an interesting idea, but I definitely would narrow it down to F/L/OSS-related organizations, as we have a very specific set of values as a movement. dj pundit On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Balázs Viczián balazs.vicz...@wikimedia.hu wrote: imo WMF is a mid-to-large sized IT company

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Risker
On 25 April 2014 15:17, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: Hi Risker, Thanks for your thoughts. Instead I suggest that the FDC seek authorization from the Board for an independent third party review if it feels that there is not the necessary ability for the FDC to produce its own

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Michael Peel
Hi Risker, On 27 Apr 2014, at 16:01, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: However, having accepted the validity of the proposal, the FDC does not have the authority to delegate its role. I think you're misunderstanding what has been delegated here. The FDC is asking WMDE to do the 'staff

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Nathan
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: Hi Risker, On 27 Apr 2014, at 16:01, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: However, having accepted the validity of the proposal, the FDC does not have the authority to delegate its role. I think you're

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Anders Wennersten
Nathan skrev 2014-04-27 19:09: n The potential problem is straightforward. Look at the FDC recommendation for WMDE in the same round as the staff assessment you linked; they are very similar - same conclusions, even similar or identical language. A little analysis would reveal how often the FDC

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Risker
On 27 April 2014 12:37, Michael Peel em...@mikepeel.net wrote: Hi Risker, On 27 Apr 2014, at 16:01, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: However, having accepted the validity of the proposal, the FDC does not have the authority to delegate its role. I think you're misunderstanding what has

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Risker, 27/04/2014 19:49: Well, no, I'm not misunderstanding. If a staff assessment is needed, then it needs to be done by staff. Inappropriate metonymy here, staff doesn't equal WMF staff. Anyway, [citation needed]. Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Risker
On 27 April 2014 14:35, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Risker, 27/04/2014 19:49: Well, no, I'm not misunderstanding. If a staff assessment is needed, then it needs to be done by staff. Inappropriate metonymy here, staff doesn't equal WMF staff. Anyway, [citation needed].

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Cristian Consonni
2014-04-27 19:49 GMT+02:00 Risker risker...@gmail.com: Well, no, I'm not misunderstanding. If a staff assessment is needed, then it needs to be done by staff. You are suggesting that the staff assessment of the WMF proposal has to be done by WMF staff, i.e. by the very same people who drafted

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Bence Damokos
What is currently stopping a community assessment from being carried out? (If indeed the community has the actual desire to do it -- I assume the data is as public as it gets at the WMF's current level of transparency.) Best regards, Bence On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Risker

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Risker
On 27 April 2014 15:01, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote: What is currently stopping a community assessment from being carried out? (If indeed the community has the actual desire to do it -- I assume the data is as public as it gets at the WMF's current level of transparency.) Best

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Bence Damokos
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 April 2014 15:01, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote: What is currently stopping a community assessment from being carried out? (If indeed the community has the actual desire to do it -- I assume the data is as

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Michael Peel
On 27 Apr 2014, at 20:19, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 9:14 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 April 2014 15:01, Bence Damokos bdamo...@gmail.com wrote: What is currently stopping a community assessment from being carried out? (If indeed the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Federico Leva (Nemo)
Risker, 27/04/2014 21:14: In the past, the WMF budget and programmatic proposals were Hello. Self-help material on WMF budget is available at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_budget Nemo ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list

[Wikimedia-l] Organizational development for the Wikimedia movement

2014-04-27 Thread Chris Keating
Hi all, I've started a page on Meta which I hope will act as a hub for documentation and ideas around the training and development needs of Wikimedia movement organisations: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Organisational_development I'd ask anyone who's interested in this kind of thing to have

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread rupert THURNER
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: On 27 April 2014 14:35, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote: Risker, 27/04/2014 19:49: Well, no, I'm not misunderstanding. If a staff assessment is needed, then it needs to be done by staff. Inappropriate

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Dariusz Jemielniak
On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Nemo, my position is that it shouldn't be being done at all because the request is outside of the FDC's scope, and that assessment is done, then community assessment will be more useful than a quasi-official, partial

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Risker
On 27 April 2014 17:23, Dariusz Jemielniak dar...@alk.edu.pl wrote: On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote: Nemo, my position is that it shouldn't be being done at all because the request is outside of the FDC's scope, and that assessment is done, then community

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Lodewijk
Just also wanted to share a more moderate sound here: I think this is, even while not perfect, a practical implementation of what FDC has been asked to do. I haven't hear any alternatives that would really be /better/ and good to implement at this moment. But maybe things could be different next

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Organizational development for the Wikimedia movement

2014-04-27 Thread
Thanks Chris. Interesting you chose to link to my unfinished peer review with WMEE, considering you asked me to halt my inter-chapter governance activities when you were the Chair of WMUK. If you think it is a good idea to allow me to finish the peer reviews I started, perhaps you should check

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Kevin Gorman
Risker: just to confirm one way or another, when you say which you shouldn't be reviewing anyway as it is a complete conflict of interest for the FDC, are you referring to the FDC evaluating the efficacy of the FDC's grants in particular, or of all WMF grantmaking programs? I would agree that

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Organizational development for the Wikimedia movement

2014-04-27 Thread Kevin Gorman
Hi Chris - Thanks for starting this; it's something we need, especially going in to the next few years. I'll aim to contribute quite a bit to the page, although the bulk of my contributions may await the end of the term. It's also probably worth noting that there will be some degree of overlap

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Gergo Tisza
Risker risker.wp@... writes: There is a huge difference between a request to any of the movement stakeholders specifically for comment and asking a specific stakeholder - one that has a lot to gain if the role of the WMF itself is diminished - to usurp the role of staff analysis. I'm really

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Assessing this round of FDC proposals, including the WMF's proposal

2014-04-27 Thread Risker
On 27 April 2014 22:04, Gergo Tisza gti...@gmail.com wrote: Risker risker.wp@... writes: There is a huge difference between a request to any of the movement stakeholders specifically for comment and asking a specific stakeholder - one that has a lot to gain if the role of the WMF itself