Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Yaroslav M. Blanter]

On 13.08.2014 02:48, svetlana wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, at 10:46, svetlana wrote:


this community thinks that its power structures allow to tromp onto 
other people


sysops aren't even held accountable
they are elected once for an infinite term
nobody reviews their contribution in position in power ever

this would surely be solved by making them elected on a 2-year term
then re-elect

svetlana



Sounds exactly like an indeffed former contributor to the Russian 
Wikipedia.


I do not think we should discuss the administrator elections on this 
list. Anyway, there are projects where administrators only get elected 
for a finite period.


Cheers
Yaroslav

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[rupert THURNER]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:26 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Magnus Manske
>  wrote:

>> Like many other "old hands", it seems to get in the way of my workflow. Not
>> an issue for me, as long as I can turn it off.

hehe, i suppose investing a million $$ to get you turning it off because it is
in your way is probably not the goal :)

>> It's probably fine for "modern" viewing, although it's hard to guess that
>> you get to the file page via the little Commons icon for people who (in all
>> likelihood) have never seen that icon, or visited Commons.

> Indeed, the icon to the File: page is currently very opaque. We're
> preparing for a round of possible changes to the viewing experience,
> potentially including
> - moving caption above the fold so readers don't have to hunt for it
> - moving disable action above-the-fold
> - potentially eliminating the below-the-fold panel entirely
> - emphasizing the File: page more prominently as the canonical source
> of metadata
> - separating out download/use actions more clearly
>
> These changes will need to be carefully tested/validated. If you want
> to take a look at an early early (!) prototype (!!), see
> http://multimedia-alpha.wmflabs.org/wiki/Lightbox_demo , but please

magnus, do these changes make you turn it on again? if not, what would need
to be better?

i think there is two kinds of feedback. (1) technical / feature / workflow
issues. like "i cannot tag easy", "esc leaves mediaviewer instead of
fullscreen", "browser zoom (ctrl-/+) does not work". "X takes one click
more now". i d love this to be taken into account.

while i find design issues more difficult. the whole user experience
needs, at least imo, consistency. tinkering here and there
may quite heavily break that. better would be to encourage
getting alternative full designs. if this would include how to
clean the commons page ... but that might be too much :)

rupert

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Board Meeting Update

[Bishakha Datta]

Dear all,

Since many have asked why I'm stepping off the board when my term ends Dec
2014: there's no dramatic reason - it's the compulsions of time. Being on
the WMF board is immensely satisfying but also a big time commitment that I
find increasingly hard to sustain.

I intend to be around in the movement, doing other things.

Best
Bishakha


On Sat, Aug 9, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:

> Many wise decisions as I see it. It is important with continuity and hands
> on experience from the movement and our projects in the Board.
>
> But the identified missing competence in the Board of management
> experience is still not resolved..(something for December appointment?)
>
> And  congratulations to Patricio, nice to see his good insights and
> competence being even more used in the Board
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> Jan-Bart de Vreede skrev 2014-08-08 15:24:
>
>  Hello Everyone
>>
>> While the minutes of the Board of Trustees meeting will arrive in due
>> time I wanted to update you on some internal matters at this point because
>> there have been some changes in the board composition.
>>
>> Ana Toni joined our board last year but unfortunately the time demands
>> placed upon a Wikimedia Board member were not compatible with her other
>> commitments. This has given the board something to think about. We aim to
>> be a board that is able to incorporate outside expertise to increase our
>> effectiveness and possible candidates are often not able to commit the time
>> which we currently require.. In the coming period we want to have a look at
>> the time which is demanded of a board member (especially our in person
>> meetings which require a lot of travel) and look at which activities we
>> need to perform as a board. We want to thank Ana for her contributions. The
>> insights gained from her position as Chair of Greenpeace International were
>> especially useful to us as a board. We are sad to see her go, but we hope
>> to keep her in “our space”.
>>
>> Bishakha Datta joined our board in March 2010 and has indicated to us
>> that she is not available for re-appointment after her term runs out in
>> December of this year. We will take the time to properly thank her for her
>> great contributions when her term formally ends in December.
>>
>> While these things are part of of the normal turnover of the composition
>> of the board (and are also an opportunity to attract new fields of
>> expertise as needed) there is a matter of board stability during the first
>> year of the tenure of our new Executive Director. In response to Lila's
>> request for stability the board has decided the following:
>>
>> 1) Alice Wiegand was appointed to finish out Ana's term ending December
>> 2014.  We also appointed Alice to carry out the subsequent term ending
>> December 2016.
>>
>> 2) Last year at Wikimania I was appointed to the board for a two year
>> period, but I tendered my resignation effective the end of this year.  At
>> the Board's request I reconsidered that resignation, and will serve out the
>> rest of my original two year term ending December 2015.
>>
>> This does mean we will start the search process for a new board member
>> for the appointed seat that Bishakha will vacate at the end of this year.
>> And hopefully we will be able to also identify potential candidates to fill
>> the seats of both Stuart West and me, which will become vacant at the end
>> of 2015.
>>
>> Secondly we have appointed the two officer positions as follows for the
>> coming fiscal year
>>
>> Chair - Jan-Bart de Vreede
>> Vice-Chair - Patricio Lorente
>>
>> The foundation has a great opportunity to grow under the guidance of our
>> new Executive Director and realize our ambitions. The board is looking
>> forward to a year of supporting Lila and providing direction for our
>> strategic goals.
>>
>> Jan-Bart de Vreede
>> Chair
>> Board of Trustees
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>>
>> PS: All the relevant resolutions will be published on meta in the coming
>> days
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Pine W]

Two points I have heard off list are that 1. While it may be that disabling
MV by default for logged-in users can be done, disabling it for those not
logged-in is effectively another major UI change which a study shows likely
will make some of them leave and not return; 2. German Wikimedians are
going inactive in protest.

Can someone confirm that both of those points are true? If so, this puts
WMF in an even more difficult position. Perhaps the communities could be I
persuaded to leave MV enabled by default for logged-out users and WMF would
agree to release superprotection and disable MV by default for logged in
users.

I fear that already volunteers may be  leaving who will not return.

Pine

On Aug 12, 2014 6:42 AM, "Romaine Wiki"  wrote:

> 2014-08-13 2:46 GMT+02:00 svetlana :
>
> > On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, at 23:42, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> > > That the community reacts the way it does now, is because they care
> very
> > > much about the site and they notice something is terrible going wrong
> on
> > > WMF side and too less is done to fix those problems/issues!
> >
> > if the community was not so willing to use force (ie a js hack) against
> > the other party
> >
>
> You miss a very important thing here: the community does not want to use
> such measure at all, but is forced to this by the inappropriate behaviour
> of some WMF staff. The community gets the feeling that it isn't listened
> to, while it has serious points and considerations which are stepped over
> too lightly. And as I said before, we are all on the same ship. Sure a
> captain must make decisions, but if parts have serious comments, issues,
> and critics, such should not be ignored.
>
>
> > instead of talking properly
> >
> > then the superprotect wouldn't exist at all
> >
> > you seeing the problem there? whose problem is it?
> > desire to act out of the blue instead of collaborating
> > they didn't collaborate at all
> > they added the js hack as if it was something urgent, that needs saving
> > people from
> >
> > i would only do this if someone added a virus into mv by mistake
> >
> > this community thinks that its power structures allow to tromp onto other
> > people
> >
>
> I do not think the community thinks that way. Members of the community can
> make mistake and staff members of WMF can make mistakes, I think that both
> that community and WMF are grown up enough to correct mistakes if they
> arise. Certainly inside the community are many critical people who watch
> these kind of things carefully and do correct those things when a mistake
> is made.
>
> The German community did collaborate, did communicate. Having a voting is a
> desperate way of getting the attention of the big problems WMF has too
> little insight in apparently. The community does not think in power
> structures, WMF does.
>
> Just as in 2013, again the problems start inside WMF and not in the
> community, and the community reacts on it.
>
> Romaine
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Romaine Wiki]

2014-08-13 2:46 GMT+02:00 svetlana :

> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, at 23:42, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> > That the community reacts the way it does now, is because they care very
> > much about the site and they notice something is terrible going wrong on
> > WMF side and too less is done to fix those problems/issues!
>
> if the community was not so willing to use force (ie a js hack) against
> the other party
>

You miss a very important thing here: the community does not want to use
such measure at all, but is forced to this by the inappropriate behaviour
of some WMF staff. The community gets the feeling that it isn't listened
to, while it has serious points and considerations which are stepped over
too lightly. And as I said before, we are all on the same ship. Sure a
captain must make decisions, but if parts have serious comments, issues,
and critics, such should not be ignored.


> instead of talking properly
>
> then the superprotect wouldn't exist at all
>
> you seeing the problem there? whose problem is it?
> desire to act out of the blue instead of collaborating
> they didn't collaborate at all
> they added the js hack as if it was something urgent, that needs saving
> people from
>
> i would only do this if someone added a virus into mv by mistake
>
> this community thinks that its power structures allow to tromp onto other
> people
>

I do not think the community thinks that way. Members of the community can
make mistake and staff members of WMF can make mistakes, I think that both
that community and WMF are grown up enough to correct mistakes if they
arise. Certainly inside the community are many critical people who watch
these kind of things carefully and do correct those things when a mistake
is made.

The German community did collaborate, did communicate. Having a voting is a
desperate way of getting the attention of the big problems WMF has too
little insight in apparently. The community does not think in power
structures, WMF does.

Just as in 2013, again the problems start inside WMF and not in the
community, and the community reacts on it.

Romaine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Romaine Wiki]

2014-08-12 21:41 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske :

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Henning Schlottmann <
> h.schlottm...@gmx.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > There is a common pattern in the conflicts between WMF and several
> > communities over software developments during the last few years. As I
> > wrote two weeks ago to Rachel:
> >
> > | Decision making seems to be focused on reader experience, including
> > | winning readers to become authors, but existing authors and their
> > | experience (in both meanings of the word) is ignored. Even by people |
> > like Eric, who once was a prolific author himself
> >
> > | Authors see themselves as the single most important group in the
> > |Wikimedia universe. Without their content, there would be nothing: No
> > | readers, no fundraising banners, no donations, no employees, no
> > | foundation. On the other hand, WMF seems to see the readers (and
> > | donors) as their main target audience. Of course WMF knows, that all
> > | the projects need content and authors, but in my opinion most of them
> > | fail in appreciating the existing authors and focus too much on
> > | winning readers to become authors, by simplifying the entry.
> >
> > This is serious. WMF really needs to appreciate the expertise of the
> > author community and accept their experience a important and valid. If
> > authors tell the WMF and particularly the devs, that a particular
> > function is necessary, then the devs really, really need to think.
> >
>
> I do agree with this. Visual Editor (which works much better these days)
> and MediaViewer are not aimed at the experienced editor. They aim to make
> the reader more comfortable, and try to ease the first steps into editing.
> Winning new editors has been deemed a priority, somewhat at the expense of
> WMF-made support for the power user. This is a judgement call the
> Foundation has to make.
>

I am not sure how it is for other wikis but we have seen bugs in the Visual
Editor which cause newbies to do wrong edits (like removing stuff which a.
should not be removed, b. was not intented to be removed by the newby) that
other users can repair later. If new software causes us extra work, purely
because of problems in the software itself, the software is absolutely not
ready to set on by default. And we are not talking about an extra tool but
about a basic functionality that is going to be used massively with many
many changes in many pages.

The first priority is having the software work well on a basic level (and
the servers in general). The second priority is to attract more new
editors.


 > Until this event, I thought the dev process to be broken, not just the
> > communication around devs. But now I believe the conflict runs deeper.
> >
>
> It points out an issue we (community and WMF) should discuss, in a more
> general sense. What should the decision process be for technical changes?
> When does the Foundation get precendence, and when should the community
> have the last word? What weight should small-scale "votes" of editors have?
> Should random polls be done, and included in such votes? Etc.
>
> The MediaViewer "affair" itself gets blown out of proportion IMO.
>

I fully agree. If a community really has serious problems, these should be
carefully considered and the community should be attacked on various ways
by WMF. At the current situation, WMF thinks in my opinion to lightly about
the role of the community, and to lightly about how she can behave towards
a community. We all want the best of each other, than this is not the way
to do that.

Romaine
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Todd Allen]

If the WF wasn't so willing to use force (i.e. pushing unwanted changes)
against the other party

instead of talking properly

then the superprotect wouldn't exist at all

you seeing the problem there? whose problem is it?
desire to act out of the blue instead of collaborating
they didn't collaborate at all
they added Media Viewer as if it was something urgent, that will save people

this WMF thinks that its power structures allow it to tromp onto other
people

Works perfectly the other way too, doesn't it?


On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 6:46 PM, svetlana  wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, at 23:42, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> > That the community reacts the way it does now, is because they care very
> > much about the site and they notice something is terrible going wrong on
> > WMF side and too less is done to fix those problems/issues!
>
> if the community was not so willing to use force (ie a js hack) against
> the other party
>
> instead of talking properly
>
> then the superprotect wouldn't exist at all
>
> you seeing the problem there? whose problem is it?
> desire to act out of the blue instead of collaborating
> they didn't collaborate at all
> they added the js hack as if it was something urgent, that needs saving
> people from
>
> i would only do this if someone added a virus into mv by mistake
>
> this community thinks that its power structures allow to tromp onto other
> people
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Pete Forsyth]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:46 PM, svetlana  wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, at 23:42, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> > That the community reacts the way it does now, is because they care very
> > much about the site and they notice something is terrible going wrong on
> > WMF side and too less is done to fix those problems/issues!
>
> if the community was not so willing to use force (ie a js hack) against
> the other party


"Using force" could equally well apply to implementing a feature without
sufficient buy-in, and then refusing to roll it back when so requested.

The WMF's basis for concluding that readers are better served with the MV
than without it is riddled with holes, as exhaustively explained elsewhere.

You talk about admin accountability, Svetlana -- but what about
accountability for the WMF, when it makes sweeping changes that (among
other things) remove any suggestion of an "edit" functionality from "the
encyclopedia anyone can edit" from millions and millions of pages?

Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 10:48 AM, svetlana  wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, at 10:46, svetlana wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, at 23:42, Romaine Wiki wrote:
>> > That the community reacts the way it does now, is because they care very
>> > much about the site and they notice something is terrible going wrong on
>> > WMF side and too less is done to fix those problems/issues!
>>
>> if the community was not so willing to use force (ie a js hack) against the 
>> other party
>>
>> instead of talking properly
>>
>> then the superprotect wouldn't exist at all
>>
>> you seeing the problem there? whose problem is it?
>> desire to act out of the blue instead of collaborating
>> they didn't collaborate at all
>> they added the js hack as if it was something urgent, that needs saving 
>> people from
>>
>> i would only do this if someone added a virus into mv by mistake
>>
>> this community thinks that its power structures allow to tromp onto other 
>> people
>
> sysops aren't even held accountable
> they are elected once for an infinite term
> nobody reviews their contribution in position in power ever
>
> this would surely be solved by making them elected on a 2-year term
> then re-elect

Hi svetlana, there are several large wikis which have sysop
re-election policies; notably, German Wikipedia.

-- 
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[svetlana]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2014, at 10:46, svetlana wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, at 23:42, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> > That the community reacts the way it does now, is because they care very
> > much about the site and they notice something is terrible going wrong on
> > WMF side and too less is done to fix those problems/issues!
> 
> if the community was not so willing to use force (ie a js hack) against the 
> other party
> 
> instead of talking properly
> 
> then the superprotect wouldn't exist at all
> 
> you seeing the problem there? whose problem is it?
> desire to act out of the blue instead of collaborating
> they didn't collaborate at all
> they added the js hack as if it was something urgent, that needs saving 
> people from
> 
> i would only do this if someone added a virus into mv by mistake
> 
> this community thinks that its power structures allow to tromp onto other 
> people

sysops aren't even held accountable
they are elected once for an infinite term
nobody reviews their contribution in position in power ever

this would surely be solved by making them elected on a 2-year term
then re-elect

svetlana

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[svetlana]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2014, at 23:42, Romaine Wiki wrote:
> That the community reacts the way it does now, is because they care very
> much about the site and they notice something is terrible going wrong on
> WMF side and too less is done to fix those problems/issues!

if the community was not so willing to use force (ie a js hack) against the 
other party

instead of talking properly

then the superprotect wouldn't exist at all

you seeing the problem there? whose problem is it?
desire to act out of the blue instead of collaborating
they didn't collaborate at all
they added the js hack as if it was something urgent, that needs saving people 
from

i would only do this if someone added a virus into mv by mistake

this community thinks that its power structures allow to tromp onto other people

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Pete Forsyth]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:41 PM, Magnus Manske  wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Henning Schlottmann <
> h.schlottm...@gmx.net>
> wrote:
>
> > This is serious. WMF really needs to appreciate the expertise of the
> > author community and accept their experience a important and valid. If
> > authors tell the WMF and particularly the devs, that a particular
> > function is necessary, then the devs really, really need to think.
> >
>
> I do agree with this. Visual Editor (which works much better these days)
> and MediaViewer are not aimed at the experienced editor. They aim to make
> the reader more comfortable, and try to ease the first steps into editing.
> Winning new editors has been deemed a priority, somewhat at the expense of
> WMF-made support for the power user. This is a judgement call the
> Foundation has to make.
>

This is the biggest aspect of the problem, from my perspective: many of us
who have opposed the default enabling of the Media Viewer have done so
*not* on the basis that we personally dislike it, but on the basis that we
believe it causes problems for the process of helping readers become
effective editors. I myself have a great deal of experience with this
process; I was hired in 2009 by WMF for my expertise in this area; I helped
design the Ambassador Training program for the WMF that helps university
students convert from readers to editors; and since I left WMF, I have
trained hundreds of others to edit Wikipedia, most notably in the 6 week
online course I developed and taught 4 times. Whether or not I, as an
experienced editor, like the Media Viewer is indeed unimportant; I have no
problem disabling the software for myself.

Many WMF staff, however, *continue* to summarize the opposition as,
"experienced editors do not like it." This is a straw man argument, and an
absolute failure to absorb the considered criticisms layed out on the
various RfC pages. At the same time, a frequent piece of the WMF argument
is, "many readers *do* like it." But whether or not they *like* it is
completely different from whether or not we are guiding them toward
becoming editors -- the two have almost nothing to do with one another.
Whether the readers "like" it has absolutely nothing to do with the five
goals layed out in the 2010 Five Year Strategic Plan. But whether or not
they are guided effectively toward becoming editors, that does. And
removing the "edit" button, or any suggestion that such a thing might
exist, from millions and millions of pages...that does not serve that goal.

The WMF chose to "Narrow Focus" a couple years ago. I believe that what got
"narrowed out" was, by and large, processes that serve the secondary
purpose of helping the WMF educate itself, in an ongoing way, about how its
projects and communities operate. I believe we are seeing the effects of
that decision now.


> >
> > Until this event, I thought the dev process to be broken, not just the
> > communication around devs. But now I believe the conflict runs deeper.
> >
>
> It points out an issue we (community and WMF) should discuss, in a more
> general sense. What should the decision process be for technical changes?
> When does the Foundation get precendence, and when should the community
> have the last word? What weight should small-scale "votes" of editors have?
>

While I agree that it's important to have some clarity on this stuff, it's
also very important -- more important, perhaps -- to keep in mind that when
things are working smoothly, we very rarely have to consider the question
of "who can overrule whom." That is the kind of ideal the WMF should be
striving for -- in actions, not merely in words.

Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Philippe Beaudette]

All,

I just want to call your attention to Lila's statement at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LilaTretikov#On_a_Scale_of_Billions
.

pb


*Philippe Beaudette * \\  Director, Community Advocacy \\ Wikimedia
Foundation, Inc.
 T: 1-415-839-6885 x6643 |  phili...@wikimedia.org  |  :  @Philippewiki



On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 2:41 PM, Magnus Manske 
wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Henning Schlottmann <
> h.schlottm...@gmx.net>
> wrote:
>
> > On 12.08.2014 16:57, Magnus Manske wrote:
> > > German Wikipedia had 1.1 billion page views in June [1]. ~300 votes
> (~2/3
> > > against MediaViewer) do not represent the readers, IMHO.
> >
> > Claiming to speak for a perceived silent majority will not help you much
> > in this discussion.
> >
>
> I do not make any such claim. All I say is that the 300 (is there a movie
> plot here?) do not necessarily speak for it, either.
>
>
> >
> > There is a common pattern in the conflicts between WMF and several
> > communities over software developments during the last few years. As I
> > wrote two weeks ago to Rachel:
> >
> > | Decision making seems to be focused on reader experience, including
> > | winning readers to become authors, but existing authors and their
> > | experience (in both meanings of the word) is ignored. Even by people |
> > like Eric, who once was a prolific author himself
> >
> > | Authors see themselves as the single most important group in the
> > |Wikimedia universe. Without their content, there would be nothing: No
> > | readers, no fundraising banners, no donations, no employees, no
> > | foundation. On the other hand, WMF seems to see the readers (and
> > | donors) as their main target audience. Of course WMF knows, that all
> > | the projects need content and authors, but in my opinion most of them
> > | fail in appreciating the existing authors and focus too much on
> > | winning readers to become authors, by simplifying the entry.
> >
> > This is serious. WMF really needs to appreciate the expertise of the
> > author community and accept their experience a important and valid. If
> > authors tell the WMF and particularly the devs, that a particular
> > function is necessary, then the devs really, really need to think.
> >
>
> I do agree with this. Visual Editor (which works much better these days)
> and MediaViewer are not aimed at the experienced editor. They aim to make
> the reader more comfortable, and try to ease the first steps into editing.
> Winning new editors has been deemed a priority, somewhat at the expense of
> WMF-made support for the power user. This is a judgement call the
> Foundation has to make.
>
>
> >
> > If the community tells the devs, that a particular idea is a bad one, a
> > feature is too buggy to be rolled out (as default) or is unsuitable for
> > a project at all, this warrants more than just a cursory thought.
> >
> > A formal RfD must not be taken lightly, overruling it by creating a
> > whole new user class, and crippling the elected admins is inpermissible.
> > WMF has broken trust again and this time in a unprecedented way.
> >
>
> As Erik pointed out, WMF had made it quite clear that they reserve the
> right to overrule the community in that specific matter, before the
> Meinungsbild was done. WMF then acted as announced, and refused to be
> "hacked" out of their own servers. An unfortunate escalation on both sides,
> but since they never promised to accept the Meinungsbild (quite the
> opposite!), it was not a breach of trust.
>
>
> >
> > Until this event, I thought the dev process to be broken, not just the
> > communication around devs. But now I believe the conflict runs deeper.
> >
>
> It points out an issue we (community and WMF) should discuss, in a more
> general sense. What should the decision process be for technical changes?
> When does the Foundation get precendence, and when should the community
> have the last word? What weight should small-scale "votes" of editors have?
> Should random polls be done, and included in such votes? Etc.
>
> The MediaViewer "affair" itself gets blown out of proportion IMO.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] is it possible to accept bitcoins without receiving stolen property?

[Todd Allen]

You do, of course, realize that any currency anyone accepts could at some
point have been stolen?
On Aug 12, 2014 3:49 PM, "James Salsman"  wrote:

> Given this news about BGP hijacking used to mine hundreds of thousands
> (if not millions) of dollars worth of bitcoins per year, as a
> practical matter concerning donations, is there any way to accept
> bitcoin payments without risking accepting stolen property?
>
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/08/bgp_hijacking_cybercriminals_used_internet_architecture_to_mine_bitcoins.html
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] is it possible to accept bitcoins without receiving stolen property?

[Andre Engels]

No, that doesn't seem possible. But that's not really different for
any other payment method either. And even if we could get payments
without risking accepting stolen property, I don't think we should.
When choosing between unwittingly accepting tainted money and forcing
people to give up their complete financial privacy, I find the first
option the least morally repugnant one.

Andre Engels

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:49 PM, James Salsman  wrote:
> Given this news about BGP hijacking used to mine hundreds of thousands
> (if not millions) of dollars worth of bitcoins per year, as a
> practical matter concerning donations, is there any way to accept
> bitcoin payments without risking accepting stolen property?
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/08/bgp_hijacking_cybercriminals_used_internet_architecture_to_mine_bitcoins.html
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 



-- 
André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] is it possible to accept bitcoins without receiving stolen property?

[James Salsman]

Given this news about BGP hijacking used to mine hundreds of thousands
(if not millions) of dollars worth of bitcoins per year, as a
practical matter concerning donations, is there any way to accept
bitcoin payments without risking accepting stolen property?

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/08/bgp_hijacking_cybercriminals_used_internet_architecture_to_mine_bitcoins.html

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Magnus Manske]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Henning Schlottmann 
wrote:

> On 12.08.2014 16:57, Magnus Manske wrote:
> > German Wikipedia had 1.1 billion page views in June [1]. ~300 votes (~2/3
> > against MediaViewer) do not represent the readers, IMHO.
>
> Claiming to speak for a perceived silent majority will not help you much
> in this discussion.
>

I do not make any such claim. All I say is that the 300 (is there a movie
plot here?) do not necessarily speak for it, either.


>
> There is a common pattern in the conflicts between WMF and several
> communities over software developments during the last few years. As I
> wrote two weeks ago to Rachel:
>
> | Decision making seems to be focused on reader experience, including
> | winning readers to become authors, but existing authors and their
> | experience (in both meanings of the word) is ignored. Even by people |
> like Eric, who once was a prolific author himself
>
> | Authors see themselves as the single most important group in the
> |Wikimedia universe. Without their content, there would be nothing: No
> | readers, no fundraising banners, no donations, no employees, no
> | foundation. On the other hand, WMF seems to see the readers (and
> | donors) as their main target audience. Of course WMF knows, that all
> | the projects need content and authors, but in my opinion most of them
> | fail in appreciating the existing authors and focus too much on
> | winning readers to become authors, by simplifying the entry.
>
> This is serious. WMF really needs to appreciate the expertise of the
> author community and accept their experience a important and valid. If
> authors tell the WMF and particularly the devs, that a particular
> function is necessary, then the devs really, really need to think.
>

I do agree with this. Visual Editor (which works much better these days)
and MediaViewer are not aimed at the experienced editor. They aim to make
the reader more comfortable, and try to ease the first steps into editing.
Winning new editors has been deemed a priority, somewhat at the expense of
WMF-made support for the power user. This is a judgement call the
Foundation has to make.


>
> If the community tells the devs, that a particular idea is a bad one, a
> feature is too buggy to be rolled out (as default) or is unsuitable for
> a project at all, this warrants more than just a cursory thought.
>
> A formal RfD must not be taken lightly, overruling it by creating a
> whole new user class, and crippling the elected admins is inpermissible.
> WMF has broken trust again and this time in a unprecedented way.
>

As Erik pointed out, WMF had made it quite clear that they reserve the
right to overrule the community in that specific matter, before the
Meinungsbild was done. WMF then acted as announced, and refused to be
"hacked" out of their own servers. An unfortunate escalation on both sides,
but since they never promised to accept the Meinungsbild (quite the
opposite!), it was not a breach of trust.


>
> Until this event, I thought the dev process to be broken, not just the
> communication around devs. But now I believe the conflict runs deeper.
>

It points out an issue we (community and WMF) should discuss, in a more
general sense. What should the decision process be for technical changes?
When does the Foundation get precendence, and when should the community
have the last word? What weight should small-scale "votes" of editors have?
Should random polls be done, and included in such votes? Etc.

The MediaViewer "affair" itself gets blown out of proportion IMO.


Cheers,
Magnus
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Richard Farmbrough]

It is very disheartening to see that active members of the community have
been Borged by the Foundation, and all tell the same story, albeit with
different levels of enthusiasm.

Quite possibly there are issues over configuration pages, but to implement
a super-protection feature *in the middle of a dispute* is ham-fisted at
best, and a blatant power grab at worst.

Many less extreme alternatives exist, and good reasons for maintaining
the *status
quo* are also not hard to find.

Since this is undoubtedly a fire, the fire-fighting steps that should be
taken immediately are:

1 Un-super-protect the page.

2 Apologise to the community

3 Give an undertaking not to use superprotect except in a clear emergency
(though I can't think of one that would justify its use) - or disable the
feature

4 Engage with the community to discuss superprotect.

Once this discussion is concluded, then and only then should a discussion
about media-viewer be entered into, meanwhile the community consensus
should be respected.

And Magnus - saying X number of people does not represent the community is
all very well,  provided that there is a mechanism for gaining a  more
representative sample - and it has been used.

All the best,  Rich Farmbrough


On 12 August 2014 19:12, Magnus Manske  wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > These changes will need to be carefully tested/validated. If you want
> > to take a look at an early early (!) prototype (!!), see
> > http://multimedia-alpha.wmflabs.org/wiki/Lightbox_demo , but please
> > note that anything but the basic view experience is placeholder right
> > now (as is the "Details" icon etc.), and the caption-above-the-fold is
> > not implemented yet. We've looked at some of this with folks at
> > Wikimania, and the community feedback there was very positive. But
> > like I said, give us a bit more time on this.
> >
>
> This looks much better! (though it appears to have problems with PNGs...)
>
>
> >
> > In answer to your query regarding how we communicated about this,
> > please note that we posted the following at the beginning of the poll:
> >
> >
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_Diskussion:Meinungsbilder/Medienbetrachter&diff=prev&oldid=132469014
> >
> >
> Thanks Erik, I somehow missed this. It is indeed ample notification.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Landline (UK) 01780 757 250
Mobile (UK) 0798 1995 792
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Pete Forsyth]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Magnus Manske  wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > These changes will need to be carefully tested/validated. If you want
> > to take a look at an early early (!) prototype (!!), see
> > http://multimedia-alpha.wmflabs.org/wiki/Lightbox_demo , but please
> > note that anything but the basic view experience is placeholder right
> > now (as is the "Details" icon etc.), and the caption-above-the-fold is
> > not implemented yet. We've looked at some of this with folks at
> > Wikimania, and the community feedback there was very positive. But
> > like I said, give us a bit more time on this.
> >
>
> This looks much better! (though it appears to have problems with PNGs...)
>

It does look better, and addresses *some* of the many major problems with
the Media Viewer. But there are still show-stopper problems. Iterating
while badly broken software is still deployed to many millions of readers
is a bad practice, though, so for the moment I'll leave it at that.

Erik, as I have said before -- your request for a bit more time would be
much better received if you would simply revert the change, as per
consensus on 3 major projects, while you work to fix this broken software.
It's a very simple and non-dramatic option you have had available the
entire time.

Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Options for the German Wikipedia

[Balázs Viczián]

It seems that poor (and insufficient) communication is a pretty widespread
problem at WMF.

Balazs


2014-08-12 13:25 GMT+02:00 Chris Keating :

> > Does either of you or anyone else see a valid reason to deny this
> > seemingly reasonable and considered request? It's quite obvious that
> hacks
> > to achieve the same ends are far from ideal. Why not simply disable
> > MediaViewer by default on the German Wikipedia, as requested?
> >
>
> In my view, the technical configuration and user experience of WMF wikis
> are areas where community discussion is advisory rather than decisive.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Abd ulRahman Lomax]

Whoever believes that an administration of a crowdsourcing website can do 
whatever they want just because they are running the website should recollect 
what recently happened to Internet Brands and Wikitravel.

Popcorn, anyone?

Wikipedia is not an organization, and the WMF does not administer the 
Wikipedias. It owns them, which gives the WMF the *legal right* to administer. 
It's quite obvious that, as the wikis have been operating, for the WMF to take 
over administration would require major changes. But it would not be 
impossible, and only a narrow imagination would conclude so.

This issue of superprotect and how it was used raises issues of power and 
control. It seems to be assumed in these discussions that this is a deliberate 
assertion of power, "we are in charge and you are not," and in a sense, it 
obviously is. However, is that the intention? Why are WMF employees confronting 
the community at this time and in this way and over a relatively small issue, 
and without a clear policy statement from the Board? The WMF has been, 
apparently, silent so far, which could mean that the Board and Executive 
Director have no plan, that they are trying to figure out what to do. This 
would be completely unsurprising.

There are now editors suggesting a strike. That would be the community -- or a 
segment of the community -- attempting to force the WMF to submit to their way. 
And the superprotect flap was the WMF attempting to force the community to 
submit to their way. That tends to be where we go first when we are sure we are 
right, and others are wrong. And if it goes this way, everyone loses, very 
likely.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Superprotect_rights


is the usual wiki train wreck, which is what happens when raw, unripe proposals 
are made. But the WMF is not like the community, it is possible for it to come 
up with reflected, deliberated response. That, indeed, is why they have the 
money and the control. I recommend no rush. Do this right.

That RfC is generating a lot of comment. Someone can and should refactor it to 
summarize the arguments, to create a true "consensus document," I've been 
calling it. But whether or not anyone will find the time to do it, I don't 
know. It's a lot of work. Still, I'd think that the WMF would be noticing that 
it touched a live wire. So now what?

 
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
I'm so excited I can't wait for Now.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Magnus Manske]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Erik Moeller  wrote:

>
>
> These changes will need to be carefully tested/validated. If you want
> to take a look at an early early (!) prototype (!!), see
> http://multimedia-alpha.wmflabs.org/wiki/Lightbox_demo , but please
> note that anything but the basic view experience is placeholder right
> now (as is the "Details" icon etc.), and the caption-above-the-fold is
> not implemented yet. We've looked at some of this with folks at
> Wikimania, and the community feedback there was very positive. But
> like I said, give us a bit more time on this.
>

This looks much better! (though it appears to have problems with PNGs...)


>
> In answer to your query regarding how we communicated about this,
> please note that we posted the following at the beginning of the poll:
>
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_Diskussion:Meinungsbilder/Medienbetrachter&diff=prev&oldid=132469014
>
>
Thanks Erik, I somehow missed this. It is indeed ample notification.

Cheers,
Magnus
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Henning Schlottmann]

On 12.08.2014 16:57, Magnus Manske wrote:
> German Wikipedia had 1.1 billion page views in June [1]. ~300 votes (~2/3
> against MediaViewer) do not represent the readers, IMHO.

Claiming to speak for a perceived silent majority will not help you much
in this discussion.

There is a common pattern in the conflicts between WMF and several
communities over software developments during the last few years. As I
wrote two weeks ago to Rachel:

| Decision making seems to be focused on reader experience, including
| winning readers to become authors, but existing authors and their
| experience (in both meanings of the word) is ignored. Even by people |
like Eric, who once was a prolific author himself

| Authors see themselves as the single most important group in the
|Wikimedia universe. Without their content, there would be nothing: No
| readers, no fundraising banners, no donations, no employees, no
| foundation. On the other hand, WMF seems to see the readers (and
| donors) as their main target audience. Of course WMF knows, that all
| the projects need content and authors, but in my opinion most of them
| fail in appreciating the existing authors and focus too much on
| winning readers to become authors, by simplifying the entry.

This is serious. WMF really needs to appreciate the expertise of the
author community and accept their experience a important and valid. If
authors tell the WMF and particularly the devs, that a particular
function is necessary, then the devs really, really need to think.

If the community tells the devs, that a particular idea is a bad one, a
feature is too buggy to be rolled out (as default) or is unsuitable for
a project at all, this warrants more than just a cursory thought.

A formal RfD must not be taken lightly, overruling it by creating a
whole new user class, and crippling the elected admins is inpermissible.
WMF has broken trust again and this time in a unprecedented way.

Until this event, I thought the dev process to be broken, not just the
communication around devs. But now I believe the conflict runs deeper.

Henning
User: H-stt (admin on deWP and Commons)




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Erik Moeller]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Magnus Manske
 wrote:

> It's probably fine for "modern" viewing, although it's hard to guess that
> you get to the file page via the little Commons icon for people who (in all
> likelihood) have never seen that icon, or visited Commons.

Dear Magnus,

Thanks as always for your thoughtful comments. It was great to see you
at Wikimania again, too. :)

Indeed, the icon to the File: page is currently very opaque. We're
preparing for a round of possible changes to the viewing experience,
potentially including
- moving caption above the fold so readers don't have to hunt for it
- moving disable action above-the-fold
- potentially eliminating the below-the-fold panel entirely
- emphasizing the File: page more prominently as the canonical source
of metadata
- separating out download/use actions more clearly

These changes will need to be carefully tested/validated. If you want
to take a look at an early early (!) prototype (!!), see
http://multimedia-alpha.wmflabs.org/wiki/Lightbox_demo , but please
note that anything but the basic view experience is placeholder right
now (as is the "Details" icon etc.), and the caption-above-the-fold is
not implemented yet. We've looked at some of this with folks at
Wikimania, and the community feedback there was very positive. But
like I said, give us a bit more time on this.

In general, Giles made a good point at the multimedia roundtable at
Wikimania: Historically, product development at WMF was so slow that
calling for an immediate rollback of a new thing that doesn't work
quite perfectly yet for everyone was a bit more appropriate. Nowadays
we really can push out a new release in a few weeks, and the constant
turning on/off is not helpful for anyone, especially for a feature
like this that can easily be disabled by anyone who doesn't like it.

In answer to your query regarding how we communicated about this,
please note that we posted the following at the beginning of the poll:
https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_Diskussion:Meinungsbilder/Medienbetrachter&diff=prev&oldid=132469014

Translation: The Wikimedia Foundation reserves the right to make a
final decision about the standard configuration of software features
in Wikimedia projects (see [[m:Limits to configuration changes]]). For
the avoidance of doubt: This includes hacks implemented via the
MediaWiki: namespace. Of course want to find a solution that is
acceptable for readers and editors. We are open to the idea that the
default setting for logged in users and logged out users should be
different.

- - -

I don't think we could have been any clearer that a MediaWiki: disable
hack would not be acceptable -- we said so from the start. We did
indeed agree to implement a different default configuration for logged
in users for Wikimedia Commons, given the unique nature of the
project. We would strongly advise against doing the same for logged in
users on Wikipedia projects, and decided not to do so in response to
the vote on de.wp. While settling on a compromise like this may be
tempting in the short term to de-escalate matters, let's only do it if
it's truly the right thing to do, not for political reasons alone.

Erik

-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Brad Jorsch (Anomie)]

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 6:54 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:49 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
>  wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 2:01 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Before this, there was no expectation that a page could be protected
> >> such that sysops could not alter the content of the superprotected
> >> page.
> >>
> >
> > This is false.
>
> Care to explain?
>

https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Manual:$wgRestrictionLevels&diff=519048&oldid=451673
shows that protection levels that prevent sysops from editing were
considered as far back as 3 April 2012, for example.


> > Most of what MZMcBride posted there has nothing to do with actually
> > breaking superprotection. Editing a page that isn't superprotected isn't
> a
> > break in the protection feature itself, for example.
>
> Of course it is.  It isnt a 'feature' until it actually works at the
> released product level.
>

You appear to be confusing superprotection with something else, likely the
much larger concept of preventing JS hacks to disable MediaViewer.


-- 
Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
Software Engineer
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Magnus Manske]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Romaine Wiki 
wrote:

> 2014-08-12 16:57 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske :
>
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:19 PM, rupert THURNER <
> rupert.thur...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > so i did not vote. because i can live with both. but i do respect the
> > vote.
> > > i do respect admin decisions, i even voted for some admins.
> > >
> > > at the end it is very simple. the one who produces software has a
> > conflict
> > > of interest. so this person or organisation is not in a good position
> to
> > > decide when it is used.
> > >
> > > wmf, its employees and voluntary officers need to be exemplary with
> > respect
> > > to conflicts of interest, imo. always. errors are allowed as well as
> > > excuses of course.
> > >
> >
> > There needs to be a balance between the wishes of (some members of) the
> > logged-in community, the (otherwise silent) majority of readers, and the
> > WMF.
> >
>
> True
>
> German Wikipedia had 1.1 billion page views in June [1]. ~300 votes (~2/3
> > against MediaViewer) do not represent the readers, IMHO.
> >
>
> I think it is more relevant to look at the number of unique visitors, in
> stead of the 1.1 billion page views.
>

I agree, but I couldn't find that number on the report card, so I used the
next best thing.
Assuming 100 page views per visitor would give 10M visitors. 80M people in
Germany alone, so probably not too far off.
That would mean that 0.003% of visitors voted, and 0.002% voted against
MediaViewer, with a ~0.001% "edge".


>
> The Foundation is tasked with managing the hardware and software that runs
> > Wikipedia. On Wikimania, several remarks were made about how outdated
> > Wikipedia appears. WMF tries to improve that situation. No, MediaViewer
> is
> > not perfect. What software is? When is it "perfect" enough to go live by
> > default? WMF should have a say there.
> >
>
> I agree that WMF should have a say, but how it is done now is certainly not
> the way WMF should handle it. Also I think it would be good to define for
> future cases how such situations should be handled. If a community has a
> strong oppose in something, such situation should be considered more
> carefully and be handled with more care. A community can't represent all
> readers, but they are themselves readers too who feel to have a large
> responsibility to the readers. They usually have valid arguments and
> considerations which should be taken more seriously. We all are on the same
> ship with the same vision on the horizon, with the same goals.
>

Yes, it could have been handled better. Actually, just saying "this is
coming by default, you can turn it off individually" /before/ the "vote"
was initiated would have been much clearer, and I don't think it would have
caused as much uproar as we have now. It also could have helped to focus
the community on finding and reporting bugs, which might have lead to
earlier improvements to the software.

And yes, the community should have a say, but this is a rather technical
issue, even if it is an interface change. The community is, and always has
been, very much in charge of content and editorial policies, beyond the
pillars.

Finally, I think that an open and detailed description by the WMF about
what, exactly, happened, and why MediaViewer is pushed against the wishes
of a small but vocal group, would help a lot to smooth the waves.

Cheers,
Magnus
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Romaine Wiki]

2014-08-12 16:57 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske :

> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:19 PM, rupert THURNER 
> wrote:
>
> > so i did not vote. because i can live with both. but i do respect the
> vote.
> > i do respect admin decisions, i even voted for some admins.
> >
> > at the end it is very simple. the one who produces software has a
> conflict
> > of interest. so this person or organisation is not in a good position to
> > decide when it is used.
> >
> > wmf, its employees and voluntary officers need to be exemplary with
> respect
> > to conflicts of interest, imo. always. errors are allowed as well as
> > excuses of course.
> >
>
> There needs to be a balance between the wishes of (some members of) the
> logged-in community, the (otherwise silent) majority of readers, and the
> WMF.
>

True

German Wikipedia had 1.1 billion page views in June [1]. ~300 votes (~2/3
> against MediaViewer) do not represent the readers, IMHO.
>

I think it is more relevant to look at the number of unique visitors, in
stead of the 1.1 billion page views.

The Foundation is tasked with managing the hardware and software that runs
> Wikipedia. On Wikimania, several remarks were made about how outdated
> Wikipedia appears. WMF tries to improve that situation. No, MediaViewer is
> not perfect. What software is? When is it "perfect" enough to go live by
> default? WMF should have a say there.
>

I agree that WMF should have a say, but how it is done now is certainly not
the way WMF should handle it. Also I think it would be good to define for
future cases how such situations should be handled. If a community has a
strong oppose in something, such situation should be considered more
carefully and be handled with more care. A community can't represent all
readers, but they are themselves readers too who feel to have a large
responsibility to the readers. They usually have valid arguments and
considerations which should be taken more seriously. We all are on the same
ship with the same vision on the horizon, with the same goals.

Romaine




> [1] https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/SummaryDE.htm
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Magnus Manske]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 3:19 PM, rupert THURNER 
wrote:

> magnus, a vote always has 3 options.
> * i am for it
> * i am against it
> * i can live with the outcome of the vote
>


You mean "do not particularly care about it", surely? That you can live
with the outcome of a vote, whatever outcome that is, is a fundamental
principle of democracy, not a voting option.



> so i did not vote. because i can live with both. but i do respect the vote.
> i do respect admin decisions, i even voted for some admins.
>
> at the end it is very simple. the one who produces software has a conflict
> of interest. so this person or organisation is not in a good position to
> decide when it is used.
>
> wmf, its employees and voluntary officers need to be exemplary with respect
> to conflicts of interest, imo. always. errors are allowed as well as
> excuses of course.
>

There needs to be a balance between the wishes of (some members of) the
logged-in community, the (otherwise silent) majority of readers, and the
WMF.

German Wikipedia had 1.1 billion page views in June [1]. ~300 votes (~2/3
against MediaViewer) do not represent the readers, IMHO.

The Foundation is tasked with managing the hardware and software that runs
Wikipedia. On Wikimania, several remarks were made about how outdated
Wikipedia appears. WMF tries to improve that situation. No, MediaViewer is
not perfect. What software is? When is it "perfect" enough to go live by
default? WMF should have a say there.


>
> magnus you said you are not happy with media viewer. and you always produce
> software people like. what should they improve?
>

Like many other "old hands", it seems to get in the way of my workflow. Not
an issue for me, as long as I can turn it off.

It's probably fine for "modern" viewing, although it's hard to guess that
you get to the file page via the little Commons icon for people who (in all
likelihood) have never seen that icon, or visited Commons.

Cheers,
Magnus

[1] https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/SummaryDE.htm


>
> rupert
> Am 12.08.2014 14:45 schrieb "Magnus Manske" :
>
> > Also, 118 people (190 vs. 72 votes in the "poll" [1] on German Wikipedia)
> > are not "the community". They are a small part of the community.
> >
> > The people who would profit [2]  from the Media Viewer as a default
> feature
> > were not consulted.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Magnus
> >
> > [1]
> > https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Medienbetrachter
> > [2] Value of ""profit" TBD
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Peter Southwood <
> > peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
> >
> > > As one has been there, done that, I would like to point out that there
> is
> > > an order of magnitude difference between Internet Brands and WMF.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Peter
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Yaroslav M.
> > Blanter
> > > Sent: 12 August 2014 02:00 PM
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki
> > near
> > > you
> > >
> > > On 12.08.2014 02:26, svetlana wrote:
> > >
> > > > If we accept the policy in principle, I don't care who enforces such
> > > > policy, that be community or WMF. Such policy does not go against
> > > > community entirely, unless WMF shows a will to reject community
> > > > patches related to issues which community finds important. Whether or
> > > > not this is the case, I don't care; it's a website in their hands and
> > > > they're welcome to shut it off without notice, or to experiment at
> > > > leisure.
> > > >
> > >
> > > > svetlana
> > > >
> > >
> > > Whoever believes that an administration of a crowdsourcing website can
> do
> > > whatever they want just because they are running the website should
> > > recollect what recently happened to Internet Brands and Wikitravel.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Yaroslav
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 
> > >
> > > -
> > > No virus found in this message.
> > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > > Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 4007/8020 - Release Date:
> 08/11/14
> > >
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > 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/Ma

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Katie Chan]

On 12/08/2014 15:19, rupert THURNER wrote:

magnus, a vote always has 3 options.
* i am for it
* i am against it
* i can live with the outcome of the vote


No, there are other options.
* I didn't know the poll was happening
* I just want to get on with editing / reading Wikipedia (or sister 
project) and are sick of the constant bickering.
* I am happy for the Foundation (after consultation) to decide on what 
features to have on the project it is entrusted in running.



at the end it is very simple. the one who produces software has a conflict
of interest. so this person or organisation is not in a good position to
decide when it is used.



And the editor community are not in the best position to decide what are 
the best features for the (overlapping but much much larger) reader 
community either.


Katie

--
Katie Chan
Any views or opinions presented in this e-mail are solely those of the author 
and do not necessarily represent the view of any organisation the author is 
associated with or employed by.


Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
 - Heinrich Heine


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[rupert THURNER]

magnus, a vote always has 3 options.
* i am for it
* i am against it
* i can live with the outcome of the vote

so i did not vote. because i can live with both. but i do respect the vote.
i do respect admin decisions, i even voted for some admins.

at the end it is very simple. the one who produces software has a conflict
of interest. so this person or organisation is not in a good position to
decide when it is used.

wmf, its employees and voluntary officers need to be exemplary with respect
to conflicts of interest, imo. always. errors are allowed as well as
excuses of course.

magnus you said you are not happy with media viewer. and you always produce
software people like. what should they improve?

rupert
Am 12.08.2014 14:45 schrieb "Magnus Manske" :

> Also, 118 people (190 vs. 72 votes in the "poll" [1] on German Wikipedia)
> are not "the community". They are a small part of the community.
>
> The people who would profit [2]  from the Media Viewer as a default feature
> were not consulted.
>
> Cheers,
> Magnus
>
> [1]
> https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Medienbetrachter
> [2] Value of ""profit" TBD
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:
>
> > As one has been there, done that, I would like to point out that there is
> > an order of magnitude difference between Internet Brands and WMF.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> > wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Yaroslav M.
> Blanter
> > Sent: 12 August 2014 02:00 PM
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki
> near
> > you
> >
> > On 12.08.2014 02:26, svetlana wrote:
> >
> > > If we accept the policy in principle, I don't care who enforces such
> > > policy, that be community or WMF. Such policy does not go against
> > > community entirely, unless WMF shows a will to reject community
> > > patches related to issues which community finds important. Whether or
> > > not this is the case, I don't care; it's a website in their hands and
> > > they're welcome to shut it off without notice, or to experiment at
> > > leisure.
> > >
> >
> > > svetlana
> > >
> >
> > Whoever believes that an administration of a crowdsourcing website can do
> > whatever they want just because they are running the website should
> > recollect what recently happened to Internet Brands and Wikitravel.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Yaroslav
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> >
> > -
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 4007/8020 - Release Date: 08/11/14
> >
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > 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
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Tech News & the communication gap (was Re: Options for the German Wikipedia)

[Quim Gil]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Dan Garry  wrote:

> On 12 August 2014 02:39, svetlana  wrote:
> >
> > There needs to be a central place, like the Wikimedia blog, but dedicated
> > to tech things - actively announcing everything WM ENGINEERING are doing,
> > both in products and in core.
>
>
> There is. It's called the monthly report. See here for July's for
> example: *
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/Report/2014/July
> *
>

Lack of information is not the problem, most of the times. In addition to
the WMF Engineering monthly reports, tech-curious wikimedians have:

* Tech News, shipped on a weekly basis, to the point, and not limited to
WMF-driven projects. A great team of volunteers lead by Odder and Guillaume
work persistently to fix this communication gap. Everybody: please
subscribe and help promoting this great resource.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech_News

* WMF Engineering short & mid term goals. Follow the links for status
reports, project plans, and direct feedback to the teams involved.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2014-15_Goals

These resources are far from perfect, but they exist today. Ideas and help
to improve them are welcome.

-- 
Quim Gil
Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Romaine Wiki]

Has it ever come to the mind that something is going wrong on how the
community is approached?

Has it ever come to the mind that some software implementations have gone
to hastily with negative effects?

That the community reacts the way it does now, is because they care very
much about the site and they notice something is terrible going wrong on
WMF side and too less is done to fix those problems/issues!

Apparently nothing (or not enough) has been learned from the VE 2013 fiasco.

Romaine


2014-08-10 15:27 GMT+02:00 Erik Moeller :

> Hi folks,
>
> Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
> experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
> etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
> for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
> apply a code review process to these changes as with any other
> deployed code, but for now the system works as it is and we have no
> intent to remove this capability.
>
> However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
> MediaWiki: namespace to disable site features is unacceptable. If such
> a conflict arises, we're prepared to revoke permissions if required.
> This protection level provides an additional path to manage these
> situations by preventing edits to the relevant pages (we're happy to
> help apply any urgent edits) until a particular situation has calmed
> down.
>
> Thanks,
> Erik
> --
> Erik Möller
> VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Thank you for Wikimania!

[phoebe ayers]

Thank you so much to the London Wikimania organizers for putting a
wonderful Wikimania 2014. I want to recognize everyone who helped out: the
core team who proposed the bid and worked for over a year organizing a
vision and a team to carry it out; the staff at Wikimedia UK and WMF who
worked on organization; the international volunteer teams who put together
the program and multiple scholarship programs; the tech staff in-person and
online; the on-the-ground volunteers who made the event go; all the
speakers, and everyone who contributed. Thank you! Pulling off a major
international conference isn't easy, and this one rocked.

This was the tenth Wikimania (!), and we had a small session reflecting on
each of the Wikimanias to date. They have all been different, but they have
certainly all had commonalities too: each Wikimania is a chance to meet
other people who are doing intriguing, wonderful things; to sit up late
into the night brainstorming and arguing about ideas; to learn from each
other about techniques for educating and talking about our projects; to
hack together.

More than anything, Wikimania is a way to recognize that we are part of a
real community of passionate and dedicated people -- people who love to
take pictures and write and code and learn new things and drink and dance
and eat stroopwafels and talk and talk and talk.

So, a huge thank you to the London team for holding a great event both for
long-time Wikimaniacs and for a whole new group of people (this was the
first Wikimania for hundreds of people, going by the opening session).

I encourage you all to watch the videos of the talks, and to keep the
"Wikimania spirit" alive this year by learning about new initiatives,
reaching out to people you don't already know who are doing cool stuff,
visiting a project that you're not familiar with and seeing what they're up
to, and experimenting with new things.

And I hope to see you all in Mexico next year!

[[<3]],
Phoebe


-- 
* I use this address for lists; send personal messages to phoebe.ayers 
gmail.com *
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Erik Moeller]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Craig Franklin
 wrote:

> I'll be writing a longer post on the Meta RFC later, but can you confirm
> whether the idea is to "superprotect" key interface pages like
> [[Mediawiki:common.js]] on a permanent basis, or will this feature only be
> used to lock pages temporarily in the case of wheel warring or other
> circumstances like what happened on de.wp?

Dear Craig,

Thank you for the question. Definitely the latter. In general, as I
mentioned in my original note, we intend to bring on-wiki
functionality that directly relates to the UI and code (i.e. chiefly
the MediaWiki: namespace, which is a highly unusual software feature
to begin with) in closer alignment with off-wiki software development,
review and deployment practices, including permission levels (e.g.
actually make it easier for anyone to submit changes, but gate changes
that impact all users).

Lila and I will post more thoughts on the larger issues within the
coming days. We deeply regret the disruptive impact this discussion is
having on Wikimedia's mission and our work together. At the same time,
working through these questions has long been overdue, and my hope is
that we can come out of this with greater clarity regarding how we
partner on issues that are often likely to be contentious, which
includes user experience changes.

Sincerely,

Erik

-- 
Erik Möller
VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Magnus Manske]

Also, 118 people (190 vs. 72 votes in the "poll" [1] on German Wikipedia)
are not "the community". They are a small part of the community.

The people who would profit [2]  from the Media Viewer as a default feature
were not consulted.

Cheers,
Magnus

[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Medienbetrachter
[2] Value of ""profit" TBD




On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Peter Southwood <
peter.southw...@telkomsa.net> wrote:

> As one has been there, done that, I would like to point out that there is
> an order of magnitude difference between Internet Brands and WMF.
> Cheers,
> Peter
>
> -Original Message-
> From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:
> wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Yaroslav M. Blanter
> Sent: 12 August 2014 02:00 PM
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near
> you
>
> On 12.08.2014 02:26, svetlana wrote:
>
> > If we accept the policy in principle, I don't care who enforces such
> > policy, that be community or WMF. Such policy does not go against
> > community entirely, unless WMF shows a will to reject community
> > patches related to issues which community finds important. Whether or
> > not this is the case, I don't care; it's a website in their hands and
> > they're welcome to shut it off without notice, or to experiment at
> > leisure.
> >
>
> > svetlana
> >
>
> Whoever believes that an administration of a crowdsourcing website can do
> whatever they want just because they are running the website should
> recollect what recently happened to Internet Brands and Wikitravel.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
> -
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 4007/8020 - Release Date: 08/11/14
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Peter Southwood]

As one has been there, done that, I would like to point out that there is an 
order of magnitude difference between Internet Brands and WMF. 
Cheers,
Peter

-Original Message-
From: wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org 
[mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Yaroslav M. 
Blanter
Sent: 12 August 2014 02:00 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

On 12.08.2014 02:26, svetlana wrote:

> If we accept the policy in principle, I don't care who enforces such 
> policy, that be community or WMF. Such policy does not go against 
> community entirely, unless WMF shows a will to reject community 
> patches related to issues which community finds important. Whether or 
> not this is the case, I don't care; it's a website in their hands and 
> they're welcome to shut it off without notice, or to experiment at 
> leisure.
> 

> svetlana
> 

Whoever believes that an administration of a crowdsourcing website can do 
whatever they want just because they are running the website should recollect 
what recently happened to Internet Brands and Wikitravel.

Cheers
Yaroslav

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 


-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2014.0.4744 / Virus Database: 4007/8020 - Release Date: 08/11/14


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[Richard Ames]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1



On 12/08/14 20:23, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Has Odder / Tomasz Kozłowski been put on moderation?

Yes.
> 
> I'm informed his emails sent to this list havent come through to
> the list for nearly 24 hrs, and he has not been notified of having
> been put on any moderation, and the moderators havent responded to
> queries sent directly, and havent actioned these moderated emails
> (deny or approve, doesnt matter) for almost a day.
> 

I approved one.  I discarded one as it had no new content.

Regards, Richard.

- -- 
rich...@ames.id.au
GPG key ID: 95C53E98
GPG key fingerprint:
4562 56B6 33CB CCB1 B9B7 529E 8BE5 076D 95C5 3E98

The greatest collection of shared knowledge in history. Help
Wikipedia, participate now: https://en.wikipedia.org/

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1
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=HuKD
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Yaroslav M. Blanter]

On 12.08.2014 02:26, svetlana wrote:


If we accept the policy in principle, I don't care who enforces such
policy, that be community or WMF. Such policy does not go against
community entirely, unless WMF shows a will to reject community
patches related to issues which community finds important. Whether or
not this is the case, I don't care; it's a website in their hands and
they're welcome to shut it off without notice, or to experiment at
leisure.




svetlana



Whoever believes that an administration of a crowdsourcing website can 
do whatever they want just because they are running the website should 
recollect what recently happened to Internet Brands and Wikitravel.


Cheers
Yaroslav

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[John Lewis]

I'm an administrator for a few lists and personally I feel you are being
far far too generic in saying lists are not managed correctly. A process is
not broken here just a users understanding.  Document don't argue regarding
processes.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[Fæ]

Hi Austin,

My wording was carefully chosen, but probably not obvious enough. I
used "working practices on lists", I was not actually referring to
*this* list where working practices are now, in my opinion, better
than many others.

In fact, it would be great if you could spend time on the meta page
previously linked, suggesting what good practices you use here that
might help run other lists in a more mellow fashion.

Thanks,
Fae

On 12/08/2014, Austin Hair  wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Fæ  wrote:
>> Current working practices on lists include never being informed that
>> it happened and never getting a reply to a polite request of why the
>> moderation is in place, along with there being no possibility of
>> appeal or timely review. More complex issues, such as moderators
>> taking action on participants with whom they are actively involved in
>> disputes, are not covered by any current guideline.
>
> I do have to dispute this. While I did not explicitly say "I have set
> your moderation bit," and in retrospect should have, I believe that
> there's a fairly obvious conclusion to be drawn when a list
> administrator tells you that your behavior is unacceptable and your
> next message is not immediately posted.
>
> What I take the most issue with is that, contrary to what John has
> said, I did not receive a single request—polite or otherwise—from
> Tomasz directly, or (so far as gmail's search function can determine)
> any inquiry at all regarding moderation prior to John's e-mail to the
> list.
>
> The matter was clarified within minutes of it being brought to my
> attention. I don't know what, if not that, constitutes "timely review"
> for you, Fae.
>
> Austin
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 


-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
Personal and confidential, please do not circulate or re-quote.

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Options for the German Wikipedia

[Chris Keating]

> Does either of you or anyone else see a valid reason to deny this
> seemingly reasonable and considered request? It's quite obvious that hacks
> to achieve the same ends are far from ideal. Why not simply disable
> MediaViewer by default on the German Wikipedia, as requested?
>

In my view, the technical configuration and user experience of WMF wikis
are areas where community discussion is advisory rather than decisive.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[Austin Hair]

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Fæ  wrote:
> Current working practices on lists include never being informed that
> it happened and never getting a reply to a polite request of why the
> moderation is in place, along with there being no possibility of
> appeal or timely review. More complex issues, such as moderators
> taking action on participants with whom they are actively involved in
> disputes, are not covered by any current guideline.

I do have to dispute this. While I did not explicitly say "I have set
your moderation bit," and in retrospect should have, I believe that
there's a fairly obvious conclusion to be drawn when a list
administrator tells you that your behavior is unacceptable and your
next message is not immediately posted.

What I take the most issue with is that, contrary to what John has
said, I did not receive a single request—polite or otherwise—from
Tomasz directly, or (so far as gmail's search function can determine)
any inquiry at all regarding moderation prior to John's e-mail to the
list.

The matter was clarified within minutes of it being brought to my
attention. I don't know what, if not that, constitutes "timely review"
for you, Fae.

Austin

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[Fæ]

On 12/08/2014, John Mark Vandenberg  wrote:
...
> I'm informed his emails sent to this list havent come through to the
> list for nearly 24 hrs, and he has not been notified of having been
> put on any moderation, and the moderators havent responded to queries
> sent directly, and havent actioned these moderated emails (deny or
> approve, doesnt matter) for almost a day.

For those interested defining best practices for our email list
moderators, there is an open discussion about the options at
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mailing_lists/Guidelines#Second_attempt_at_Moderation_guideline_.28July_2014.29
Please do contribute.

Current working practices on lists include never being informed that
it happened and never getting a reply to a polite request of why the
moderation is in place, along with there being no possibility of
appeal or timely review. More complex issues, such as moderators
taking action on participants with whom they are actively involved in
disputes, are not covered by any current guideline.

Fae
-- 
fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[Austin Hair]

Yes, I temporarily placed Tomasz on moderation after his personal
attacks on the list. I apologize for apparently not making this clear
enough with my on-list warning.

I spent most of yesterday afternoon traveling home from Wikimania, and
have not seen any messages from him since. As the admin queue is
empty, I can only conclude that they were dealt with by another person
with access to the administrator interface.

Austin


On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 11:23 AM, John Mark Vandenberg  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Has Odder / Tomasz Kozłowski been put on moderation?
>
> I'm informed his emails sent to this list havent come through to the
> list for nearly 24 hrs, and he has not been notified of having been
> put on any moderation, and the moderators havent responded to queries
> sent directly, and havent actioned these moderated emails (deny or
> approve, doesnt matter) for almost a day.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[John Mark Vandenberg]

Thx Tim.

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:40 PM, Tim Starling  wrote:
> On 12/08/14 11:23, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Has Odder / Tomasz Kozłowski been put on moderation?
>>
>> I'm informed his emails sent to this list havent come through to the
>> list for nearly 24 hrs, and he has not been notified of having been
>> put on any moderation, and the moderators havent responded to queries
>> sent directly, and havent actioned these moderated emails (deny or
>> approve, doesnt matter) for almost a day.
>
> Yes, according to the mailman admin interface, he's on moderation.
> There are no pending moderator requests for wikimedia-l.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 



-- 
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[Tim Starling]

On 12/08/14 11:23, John Mark Vandenberg wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Has Odder / Tomasz Kozłowski been put on moderation?
> 
> I'm informed his emails sent to this list havent come through to the
> list for nearly 24 hrs, and he has not been notified of having been
> put on any moderation, and the moderators havent responded to queries
> sent directly, and havent actioned these moderated emails (deny or
> approve, doesnt matter) for almost a day.

Yes, according to the mailman admin interface, he's on moderation.
There are no pending moderator requests for wikimedia-l.

-- Tim Starling


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Odder on moderation?!

[John Mark Vandenberg]

Hi,

Has Odder / Tomasz Kozłowski been put on moderation?

I'm informed his emails sent to this list havent come through to the
list for nearly 24 hrs, and he has not been notified of having been
put on any moderation, and the moderators havent responded to queries
sent directly, and havent actioned these moderated emails (deny or
approve, doesnt matter) for almost a day.

-- 
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Options for the German Wikipedia

[Guillaume Paumier]

Hi,

On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Dan Garry  wrote:
> On 12 August 2014 02:39, svetlana  wrote:
>>
>> There needs to be a central place, like the Wikimedia blog, but dedicated
>> to tech things - actively announcing everything WM ENGINEERING are doing,
>> both in products and in core.
>
>
> There is. It's called the monthly report. See here for July's for
> example: 
> *https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/Report/2014/July

Just a small note: The July report is still being drafted; the latest
published report is the one for June:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/Report/2014/June
. My apologies for forgetting to add the draft template when I created
the page.

To see the latest status update of all current activities* at any
given time, see the Wikimedia engineering status dashboard:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/Dashboard

[*] Except for those documented on other wikis, like the work of the
Operations team.

-- 
Guillaume Paumier

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Pine W]

Straniu, Jimbo's comments in his keynote about forking concerned
encouraging competent editors who can't work cooperatively with other
people to fork in a way that would be better for everyone in the long run.
I don't believe this disappointing  confrontation between the WMF and
volunteers were what Jimbo had in mind.

Pine
On Aug 12, 2014 1:44 AM, "Strainu"  wrote:

> Hi Gerard,
>
> Some answers (in a random order).
>
> 2014-08-11 12:20 GMT+03:00 Gerard Meijssen :
> > You know our projects, you know our licenses. If you, the "community"do
> not
> > like what you have, you can fork. At Wikimania forking and leaving the
> > community was very much discussed. Watch Jimbo's presentation for
> instance,
> > he may be aghast that I quote him here but in his state of the Wiki he
> made
> > it abundantly clear that it is your option to stay or go.
>
> I gave up watching Jimbo's keynotes a few years ago, as I would
> invariably get pissed off. So, should we understand that the vast
> ammounts of money and resources spent on editor retention are a waste
> of our money? I sincerely hope this is a heat-of-the-moment argument,
> just like the one about closing de.wp.
>
> > Hoi,
> > Code review should be a strictly technical process surely. However the
> > community CANNOT decide on everything.
>
> Agreed. How about letting the WMF decide for anonymous users and the
> community decide for logged-in users? Presumably, the logged-in users
> have access to a large panel of options and can make up their own mind
> if they disagree with the consensus. Of course, discussions should not
> disappear because of such a separation, but even become more active
> and hopefully less aggressive.
>
>
> > When you are in those conversations you realise that many
> > complications are considered; it is not easy nor obvious.
> > NB there is not one community, there are many with often completely
> > diverging opinions. Technically it is not possible to always keep
> backward
> > compatibility / functionality. We are not backward we need to stay
> > contemporary.
>
> As a software engineer in a publicly traded company, I understand the
> reasoning behind more than 90% of the decisions made by the
> Engineering staff - and this worries me terribly, because they *don't*
> work for a company. Their objectives and approaches should be
> different.
>
> There are three main wiki-use-cases that should receive similar levels
> of attention:
> * reading
> * basic editing
> * advanced editing
>
> The first two receive a lot of love, but the third one not so much,
> it's even hindered by initiatives designed for the first two. I'm not
> saying that we should keep backwards compatibility forever, but since
> the WMF wants to deploy stuff early in order to get feedback, it
> should begin by offering it as a beta (they do that now), then, when
> reaching a decent level of stability, deploy it for anonymous users
> and opt-in users and only when it reaches feature-parity with the
> feature being replaced should it be pushed for everybody (keeping an
> opt-out feature for some time - months or a couple of years).
>
> Take for instance the media viewer: the current version is useless for
> editors, as it has basically no controls visible by default (without
> scrolling). The future version, presented at Wikimania, has a lot more
> stuff visible on the first screen, making it much easier to use for
> editing. I believe that the media viewer should have been kept as
> opt-in for logged in users until this future version arrives.
>
> Strainu
>
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you

[Craig Franklin]

Erik,

I'll be writing a longer post on the Meta RFC later, but can you confirm
whether the idea is to "superprotect" key interface pages like
[[Mediawiki:common.js]] on a permanent basis, or will this feature only be
used to lock pages temporarily in the case of wheel warring or other
circumstances like what happened on de.wp?

Thanks,
Craig Franklin


On 10 August 2014 23:27, Erik Moeller  wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
> experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
> etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
> for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
> apply a code review process to these changes as with any other
> deployed code, but for now the system works as it is and we have no
> intent to remove this capability.
>
> However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
> MediaWiki: namespace to disable site features is unacceptable. If such
> a conflict arises, we're prepared to revoke permissions if required.
> This protection level provides an additional path to manage these
> situations by preventing edits to the relevant pages (we're happy to
> help apply any urgent edits) until a particular situation has calmed
> down.
>
> Thanks,
> Erik
> --
> Erik Möller
> VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> 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
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Options for the German Wikipedia

[Dan Garry]

On 12 August 2014 02:39, svetlana  wrote:
>
> There needs to be a central place, like the Wikimedia blog, but dedicated
> to tech things - actively announcing everything WM ENGINEERING are doing,
> both in products and in core.


There is. It's called the monthly report. See here for July's for
example: *https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/Report/2014/July
*

-- 
Dan Garry
Associate Product Manager, Mobile Apps
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] VisualEditor Office Hours for August and September

[Erica Litrenta]

Hi all,
this is just a reminder that the next VE office hour is on Thursday 14
August at 900 UTC,
in case you want to add it to your calendar.

Hope to see you there,
Elitre (WMF)
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,