[Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Shared Knowledge as a Wikimedia User Group
Dear all, The Affiliations Committee is glad to announce the recognition [1] of Shared Knowledge as a Wikimedia User Group [2]. They have been around for almost a year, and their main interest is to develop free knowledge and make it more accessible, especially in the Macedonian language. Congratulations and welcome! Regards, Carlos 1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Shared_Knowledge_-_Liaison_approval,_February_2015 2: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Shared_Knowledge -- *Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain. Carlos M. Colina Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve http://wikimedia.org.ve Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee Phone: +972-52-4869915 Twitter: @maor_x ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Types of allowed projects for grant funding (renamed)
Hoi, I alone have contributed millions of edits thanks to Magnus's tools. The whole GLAM phenomenon relies on our volunteers and on the GLAM-wiki toolset. When you consider their proven importance it is difficult, if not impossible, to understand why all such tools have been given the Cinderella treatment. When I consider the way the WMF treats prerequisites like Labs, I find it is given the same treatment. We know that there is not sufficient staffing and hardware and the priorities of the big sister projects takes staffing easily away. When you consider down time of Labs and Labs applications things have been getting worse. I do not blame, Magnus, the Labs team nor the Wikidata team I blame the WMF that could so easily be mistaken for the en,WPF. This is systemic just consider the recent report of 2014 where the other Cinderella projects like Wikisource, Wikidata, Wikibooks were not mentioned at all. When you think this is not true, please let us know what plans there are to support the Cinderella projects. How much funding, human resources are available for them. How do you think I, as a long time Wikimedian, became this harsh in my opinion? I ask for plans because what else is there ? I find that the WMF is self absorbed and while it considers itself clear in its objectives what options are there so that the Cinderella's can go to the ball as well in the off chance of glass slippers and a prince. Thanks, On 22 February 2015 at 02:39, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 4:19 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Erik seems to be pushing toward a model that favors using OAuth and the MediaWiki API over deep integration that comes with a MediaWiki extension. He recently mentioned this here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/glamtools/2015-February/000343.html He may be right that development for deployment to the Wikimedia Foundation cluster may not be the best approach for every project, but I think this view overlooks all the very real benefits that extension deployment includes. I don't think one size fits all -- every case needs to be judged on its merits, though in the case of GLAMWikiToolset I am definitely arguing for considering separation from the MediaWiki codebase because it is so highly specialized. I also think we sometimes still have a tendency to underestimate the value of non-MediaWiki tools and apps, even though they've contributed millions of edits to Wikimedia wikis already (though to be fair, without Magnus Manske the tally would not be nearly as awesome). Regarding the criteria for grantmaking, I think this initial blanket prohibition against all MediaWiki extension development is indeed something we ought to revisit. These grants can cover tens of thousands of dollars of paid work, so we shouldn't treat the review and integration burden lightly, and avoiding stalled projects that are going nowhere was a reason I advocated for this restriction to begin with. But as long as there is a good plan in place -- either not significantly dependent on WMF or with clear commitments negotiated upfront -- I do agree that the risks can be significantly mitigated. Damon, Luis and members of their teams will need to weigh in on this, and will want to think through the implications for their respective areas, but it's a good conversation to have -- keeping in mind that Luis is just starting in his new role, so please give him at least a few days to get up to speed. ;-) Erik -- Erik Möller VP of Product Strategy, 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Renewal of Recognition to Wikimedia Community User Group Brasil
Dear Rodrigo, The requirements for WUGs are very simple and the Affiliation Committee has been working recently on making the process of renewing the recognition of WUGs as straighforward as possible, since it is something relatively new and we have seen there is plenty of room for improvement.. This means that in the event a WUG is complying with the basic recognition requirements, is not transgreding basic rules of conduct against other wikimedians and there are actively committed Wikimedians behind it working to advance the mission of our movement, the Affiliations Committee will continue recognizing it as a movement affiliate and would encourage other volunteers to either join it, create another one, or simply work as an individual, which is perfectly valid. For the AffCom, the simple will expressed from the contact persons from a specific WUG regarding their interest in renovating the recognition is considered enough proof of activity, along with some details provided in the communication. There is no need for a report of activities with a raised seal and stuff :-). I hope this clarifies any doubt you have about the recognition of the WCUG Brasil. Thank you, Carlos El 19/02/2015 a las 01:00 a.m., Rodrigo Padula escribió: Hello Carlos, Can you list here the links of the activities report that AffCom checked to confirm the level of actitivity of this user group? Best regards Rodrigo Padula Em 18/02/2015 14:24, Carlos M. Colina ma...@wikimedia.org.ve escreveu: Dear all, The Affiliations Committee has recently resolved [1] to renew the recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Brasil as a Wikimedia User Group for another year. /Parabéns /to our fellow wikimedians in Brazil and looking forward to see more activities and events from you guys! Tudo de bom! :-) Regards, Carlos 1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/ Resolutions/Renewals/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Brasil_-_February_2015 -- *Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain. Carlos M. Colina Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve http://wikimedia.org.ve Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee Phone: +972-52-4869915 Twitter: @maor_x ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe -- *Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain. Carlos M. Colina Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve http://wikimedia.org.ve Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee Phone: +972-52-4869915 Twitter: @maor_x ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [Commons-l] Help fund a macro lens for a Commons contributor
Messaggio inoltrato Oggetto: [Commons-l] Help fund a macro lens for a Commons contributor Data: Sun, 22 Feb 2015 12:26:05 + Mittente: Tomasz W. Kozłowski twkozlow...@gmail.com Rispondi-a: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List common...@lists.wikimedia.org A: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org CC: common...@lists.wikimedia.org Hi list, this is just to let you know that a group of Commons volunteers have just launched a crowdfunding campaign at Indiegogo to fund a macro lens for Jeevan Jose a.k.a. Jkadavoor so as to allow him to take even better pictures of the amazing biodiversity in his home state of Kerala, India. The pictures, of course, are released by Jee under a free licence and uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, and then used in Wikipedia articles in multiple languages. As an uninvolved person who has just been made aware of this, all I can say is: have a look at the campaign page at http://igg.me/at/jkadavoor and decide for yourselves whether this is a project you want to help with. [CC-ing this to the Commons mailing list as well.] Regards, -- Tomasz W. Kozlowski a.k.a. [[user:odder]] ___ Commons-l mailing list common...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding bot maintenance
I am a dev and am willing to replace a tool when it dies. I have a fairly large infrastructure of code that makes it fairly easy On Sunday, February 22, 2015, WereSpielChequers werespielchequ...@gmail.com wrote: One of the areas that I would like to see the foundation putting in money is for the running and maintenance of wanted orphan bots. Wanted in the sense that editors are using them or would if they were still running, and orphan in the sense that the original developer isn't around or available to run them/migrate them to the latest platform. If we work on the premise that community funds should go for things that volunteers want to have happen but aren't volunteering to do, then this is a classic and uncontentious niche. Programmers like to write new code and solve new problems, but the person with the idea or who writes new code doesn't always have the time and motivation to keep maintaining and running that code, let alone creating slightly bespoke version for scores of our thousand wikis. Now it may be that we are in an unusual situation that the migration from toolserver to labs has cost us a number of bots that would otherwise have continued for years. But there will always be demand to localise existing bots for wikis where they don't currently run, and in the long run all of our volunteer bot writers are likely to move on. Employing a python programmer or two somewhere cheap like India or South America would not be a huge investment for the foundation, but it would be a valuable service to the community, and unlike mediawiki development this could be completely volunteer driven with wikimedians deciding which bots are worth maintaining and their relative priority. Disclosure: whilst I'm not pitching for the money for this, I would be front of the queue to ask such a maintainer to take on bots that I used to use the results of and in at least one case which I designed. Regards Jonathan/WereSpielChequers On 22 Feb 2015, at 11:42, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; wrote: Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; -- Message: 3 Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2015 17:39:31 -0800 From: Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org javascript:; To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Types of allowed projects for grant funding (renamed) Message-ID: CAEg6ZHmFQ-K8tksj==b-cx1ankcc+wy1gcfk+0+pkis38uk...@mail.gmail.com javascript:; Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 4:19 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com javascript:; wrote: Erik seems to be pushing toward a model that favors using OAuth and the MediaWiki API over deep integration that comes with a MediaWiki extension. He recently mentioned this here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/glamtools/2015-February/000343.html He may be right that development for deployment to the Wikimedia Foundation cluster may not be the best approach for every project, but I think this view overlooks all the very real benefits that extension deployment includes. I don't think one size fits all -- every case needs to be judged on its merits, though in the case of GLAMWikiToolset I am definitely arguing for considering separation from the MediaWiki codebase because it is so highly specialized. I also think we sometimes still have a tendency to underestimate the value of non-MediaWiki tools and apps, even though they've contributed millions of edits to Wikimedia wikis already (though to be fair, without Magnus Manske the tally would not be nearly as awesome). Regarding the criteria for grantmaking, I think this initial blanket prohibition against all MediaWiki extension development is indeed something we ought to revisit. These grants can cover tens of thousands of dollars of paid work, so we shouldn't treat the review and integration burden lightly, and avoiding stalled projects that are going nowhere was a reason I advocated for this restriction to begin with. But as long as there is a good plan in place -- either not significantly dependent on WMF or with clear commitments negotiated upfront -- I do agree that the risks can be significantly mitigated. Damon, Luis and members of their teams will need to weigh in on this, and will want to think through the implications for their respective areas, but it's a good conversation to have -- keeping in mind that Luis is just starting in his new role, so please give him at least a few days to get up to speed. ;-) Erik -- Erik Möller VP of Product
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMCON15 - Registration Now Open
Hey Daniela, I saw that the prices on the Hotel website are cheaper (78 euro). Would you advise to book directly trough them? *Regards,Itzik Edri* Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment! On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Daniela Gentner daniela.gent...@wikimedia.de wrote: Dear Tomasz, please note that there are no conference fees. The costs for accommodation are as follows: - Single room: 88,50 € per room/night - Double room: 113 € per room/night (56,50 € per person) If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. All the best, Daniela On 13 February 2015 at 16:22, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you for update. Could you give us some information about the costs of accomodation and conference fee (?) - at least roughly ? 2015-02-13 12:52 GMT+01:00 Daniela Gentner daniela.gent...@wikimedia.de : Dear Wikimedians, We are delighted to update you today regarding the upcoming Wikimedia Conference[1], which will be held in Berlin on May 14-17, 2015. Wikimedia Deutschland’s event team looks forward to making the logistics as smoothly as possible for everyone involved and to supporting you in the upcoming months. Please find below important information regarding the registration procedure, eligibility for participation as well as specifics in regards to travel and hotel bookings. == Registration now open! == Registration for the Wikimedia Conference 2015 is now open. Persons who are selected by their organization to represent them at the conference need to register via the registration form.[2] The registration will close on Monday, March 16, 2015. For visa applicants we strongly recommend to register until Monday, February 23, 2015 and to check the amount of time needed for applications to Schengen states. We will publish all participants’ names on the meta page shortly after their registration in order to help affiliates check that only their selected representatives have registered. Please make sure to check this page regularly.[3] == Who is invited to attend? == The eligibility criteria for participating in the Wikimedia Conference 2015 have been aligned to the Affiliates’ Agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation. Please note that the criteria have changed compared to last year. [2] Affiliates must have shown signs of recent activity AND be up-to-date on their reporting by the eligibility deadline (February 28). Moreover, affiliates need to have been officially recognized by the Wikimedia Foundation before February 01, 2015. Chapters and Thematic Organizations can send two delegates, or up to four, if they have paid staff; User Groups can send one delegate. An overview of the eligibility statuses is published on Meta.[4] Please check this first. Affiliates are asked to only send delegates that are well-informed in goings-on at the affiliate, able to confidently answer questions about it and share experience from their group. They should also be empowered to commit their group to involvement in proposed projects or initiatives. We also hope that several members of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and staff, the Funds Dissemination Committee as well as the Affiliations Committee will participate in the conference. We see a huge advantage in having their representatives on site and encourage them to take part in a range of talks and discussions. Please also register via the registration link. ==Travel and hotel booking== We are happy to announce that all participants will be accommodated in the same hotel. WMDE has blocked a number of single and double rooms at the hotel Motel One Leipziger Platz. Affiliates that already have WMCON funding will need to book their travel and hotel rooms individually. Affiliates without WMCON funding will be supported by the WMF for their travel and by WMDE for their hotel needs. Please check Meta [4] for your status. All participants are requested to register. To which group you belong will be inquired in the registration form. We would like to express our appreciation and sincere thanks to the Wikimedia Foundation for their collaboration and support. Wikimedia Deutschland is looking forward to welcoming you in Berlin in May! Please do not hesitate to reach out to us any time via wm...@wikimedia.de should you have any questions or comments. Best regards, Daniela on behalf of the Event Team Wikimedia Deutschland wm...@wikimedia.de [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2015 [2]
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMCON15 - Registration Now Open
Hey Daniela, I saw that the prices on the Hotel website are cheaper (78 euro). Would you advise to book directly trough them? *Regards,Itzik Edri* Chairperson, Wikimedia Israel +972-(0)-54-5878078 | http://www.wikimedia.org.il Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment! On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Daniela Gentner daniela.gent...@wikimedia.de wrote: Dear Tomasz, please note that there are no conference fees. The costs for accommodation are as follows: - Single room: 88,50 € per room/night - Double room: 113 € per room/night (56,50 € per person) If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. All the best, Daniela On 13 February 2015 at 16:22, Tomasz Ganicz polime...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you for update. Could you give us some information about the costs of accomodation and conference fee (?) - at least roughly ? 2015-02-13 12:52 GMT+01:00 Daniela Gentner daniela.gent...@wikimedia.de : Dear Wikimedians, We are delighted to update you today regarding the upcoming Wikimedia Conference[1], which will be held in Berlin on May 14-17, 2015. Wikimedia Deutschland’s event team looks forward to making the logistics as smoothly as possible for everyone involved and to supporting you in the upcoming months. Please find below important information regarding the registration procedure, eligibility for participation as well as specifics in regards to travel and hotel bookings. == Registration now open! == Registration for the Wikimedia Conference 2015 is now open. Persons who are selected by their organization to represent them at the conference need to register via the registration form.[2] The registration will close on Monday, March 16, 2015. For visa applicants we strongly recommend to register until Monday, February 23, 2015 and to check the amount of time needed for applications to Schengen states. We will publish all participants’ names on the meta page shortly after their registration in order to help affiliates check that only their selected representatives have registered. Please make sure to check this page regularly.[3] == Who is invited to attend? == The eligibility criteria for participating in the Wikimedia Conference 2015 have been aligned to the Affiliates’ Agreements with the Wikimedia Foundation. Please note that the criteria have changed compared to last year. [2] Affiliates must have shown signs of recent activity AND be up-to-date on their reporting by the eligibility deadline (February 28). Moreover, affiliates need to have been officially recognized by the Wikimedia Foundation before February 01, 2015. Chapters and Thematic Organizations can send two delegates, or up to four, if they have paid staff; User Groups can send one delegate. An overview of the eligibility statuses is published on Meta.[4] Please check this first. Affiliates are asked to only send delegates that are well-informed in goings-on at the affiliate, able to confidently answer questions about it and share experience from their group. They should also be empowered to commit their group to involvement in proposed projects or initiatives. We also hope that several members of the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and staff, the Funds Dissemination Committee as well as the Affiliations Committee will participate in the conference. We see a huge advantage in having their representatives on site and encourage them to take part in a range of talks and discussions. Please also register via the registration link. ==Travel and hotel booking== We are happy to announce that all participants will be accommodated in the same hotel. WMDE has blocked a number of single and double rooms at the hotel Motel One Leipziger Platz. Affiliates that already have WMCON funding will need to book their travel and hotel rooms individually. Affiliates without WMCON funding will be supported by the WMF for their travel and by WMDE for their hotel needs. Please check Meta [4] for your status. All participants are requested to register. To which group you belong will be inquired in the registration form. We would like to express our appreciation and sincere thanks to the Wikimedia Foundation for their collaboration and support. Wikimedia Deutschland is looking forward to welcoming you in Berlin in May! Please do not hesitate to reach out to us any time via wm...@wikimedia.de should you have any questions or comments. Best regards, Daniela on behalf of the Event Team Wikimedia Deutschland wm...@wikimedia.de [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Conference_2015 [2]
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Types of allowed projects for grant funding (renamed)
Hi Luis, Thank you for agreeing to consider grant funding for software projects. It sounds like you also plan a broader review of funding for community needs and growth. I have a list of requests for changes, which boil down to removing policy barriers and greatly improving communications and workflows so that community growth is fostered and volunteer time is used wisely. I imagine that we will have an opportunity to discuss these matters in person in Berlin. I look forward to seeing you there, and I greatly appreciate your interest in supporting communities and contributor growth. Pine On Feb 21, 2015 6:12 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Damon, Luis and members of their teams will need to weigh in on this, and will want to think through the implications for their respective areas, but it's a good conversation to have -- keeping in mind that Luis is just starting in his new role, so please give him at least a few days to get up to speed. ;-) Thanks for at least a few hours of cushion, Erik ;) I'm a big believer in the power of/need for software tools, and at least philosophically I'm very open to funding software development outside the Foundation (though obviously there are lots of pragmatic difficulties - code review, etc.) So, yes, as part of our broader review of how we support communities and contributor growth, CE will look at funding code very seriously. Luis -- Luis Villa Sr. Director of Community Engagement Wikimedia Foundation *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment.* ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] Types of allowed projects for grant funding (renamed)
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 12:24 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Luis, Thank you for agreeing to consider grant funding for software projects. It sounds like you also plan a broader review of funding for community needs and growth. Yes. The timeline is still somewhat up in the air, but soon - likely sooner than Berlin. I have a list of requests for changes, which boil down to removing policy barriers and greatly improving communications and workflows so that community growth is fostered and volunteer time is used wisely. I'd be interested to hear those, though probably on meta rather than here. I greatly appreciate your interest in supporting communities and contributor growth. Thanks. Of course, the Foundation has long been active on those areas (we spend millions of dollars a year doing them!) but I think we're always interested in doing it better. Luis Pine On Feb 21, 2015 6:12 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote: Damon, Luis and members of their teams will need to weigh in on this, and will want to think through the implications for their respective areas, but it's a good conversation to have -- keeping in mind that Luis is just starting in his new role, so please give him at least a few days to get up to speed. ;-) Thanks for at least a few hours of cushion, Erik ;) I'm a big believer in the power of/need for software tools, and at least philosophically I'm very open to funding software development outside the Foundation (though obviously there are lots of pragmatic difficulties - code review, etc.) So, yes, as part of our broader review of how we support communities and contributor growth, CE will look at funding code very seriously. Luis -- Luis Villa Sr. Director of Community Engagement Wikimedia Foundation *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment.* ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikitech-l mailing list wikitec...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l -- Luis Villa Sr. Director of Community Engagement Wikimedia Foundation *Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment.* ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Funding bot maintenance
WereSpielChequers wrote: One of the areas that I would like to see the foundation putting in money is for the running and maintenance of wanted orphan bots. I think specific examples might help here. If we're talking about category renaming bots or talk page archiving bots, I wouldn't mind if they died. The key is having suitable replacements in place first, of course. Employing a python programmer or two somewhere cheap like India or South America would not be a huge investment for the foundation, but it would be a valuable service to the community, and unlike mediawiki development this could be completely volunteer driven with wikimedians deciding which bots are worth maintaining and their relative priority. Do you have a ballpark estimate of how much money we're talking about per year per programmer? I'm mostly just curious how it would compare to hiring someone in San Francisco, for example. Was the Wikimedia Foundation intended to be a technology company? Is the current Wikimedia Foundation suited to be a technology company or would it be better off contracting out development? These are probably higher level questions, but they're inter-related with what we're discussing here. But more to your point about hiring cheaper labor, we don't know if a popular tool means that the approach taken was the best or should be sustained. We ideally want scalable, sustainable, and secure tools. I'm pretty wary of the idea that we could easily outsource this work. MZMcBride ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Announcement: A new structure for WMF Community Engagement
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Lila Tretikov l...@wikimedia.org wrote: Dear Wikimedians, Among the WMF’s top priorities for 2015 is strengthening our engagement with Wikimedia editors and volunteers. Today we are taking the first step by bringing together the people who know our communities best and asking them to break barriers and improve engagement. Let me join in congratulating Luis and Siko, and a huge thank you to Anasuya -- your good humor, kindness and unflagging recognition of individual motivations and issues while also setting up complex global funding systems always inspired me. And to the core priority of the WMF working more closely with volunteers -- I think this is very much the right direction! best, Phoebe ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] RfC: Works which can't be freely licensed
As some of you know, we are working on the project [1] with Matica srpska [2]. Basically, that opens numerous possibilities and here is one of them. My professor, a Board member of Matica srpska and one of two co-authors of the Normative Grammar of Serbian Language wants to open the Grammar. Before I continue, I want to explain how good faith academics and university professors in Serbia treat their work in relation to the open and free access (and I suppose it's quite common for any part of the world): * Personally, they are not motivated by money. They are well established socially, financially secure and they are mature people, not fascinated by luxury, living modest lives. * They want their works to be as much accessible as it's possible, as well as as much used by other scientists as it's possible. * The only financial issue in such circumstances is related to the financial safety of particular institution (in this case Matica srpska). However, financial gains from selling the books are relatively small, it's about capital works and having them is a kind of obligation of every intellectual in Serbia and it's questionable would they lose (small amount of) money by opening the content or they would actually gain. In other words, I am addressing this issue on the level of going slowly to the process and making financial analysis of every step. * They don't really get variety of the licensing options. For them, it's practically the same if it's CC-BY or Encarta web license. If they open content, their default is that they are not counting on money from published books. * The only issue which they have is to keep their integrity and not to present their work as their if it could be edited by anyone. (Thus, inclusion of the dictionaries will go in the form similar to Milos, based on Serbian Ornithological Dictionary.) And all of those things are clear while we are talking about regular content. What we have here is the *Normative* Grammar. From my perspective, that can't go under anything which doesn't assume ND part. Obviously to me, if something is prescriptive work, it should go as-is. However, that's my initial assumption. If there is an option to open it more freely, I'd be happy to hear the argumentation. [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Interglider.ORG/Wiktionary_Meets_Matica_Srpska [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Matica_srpska ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
[Wikimedia-l] Recognition of Wikimedia Community User Group Georgia
Dear all, We are glad to announce that the Affiliations Committee has recognised [1] Wikimedia Community User Group Georgia [2] as a Wikimedia User Group. They have been around for some time, working on disseminating free knowledge in Georgia, but they have decided to join forces. Among their main interests we can name promoting the awareness of the Georgian Wikimedia projects, engaging the community and gain new contributors for the User Group and Wikimedia projects, cooperating with other institutions with similar missions and visions to promote free knowledge movement in Georgia and working on the formation of Wikimedia Georgia chapter. / /Now, we can say that there is an affiliate on each country in the Caucasus! Welcome! Carlos 1: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Affiliations_Committee/Resolutions/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Georgia_-_Liaison_approval,_February_2015 2: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Community_User_Group_Georgia -- *Jülüjain wane mmakat* ein kapülain tü alijunakalirua jee wayuukanairua junain ekerolaa alümüin supüshuwayale etijaanaka. Ayatashi waya junain. Carlos M. Colina Socio, A.C. Wikimedia Venezuela | RIF J-40129321-2 | www.wikimedia.org.ve http://wikimedia.org.ve Chair, Wikimedia Foundation Affiliations Committee Phone: +972-52-4869915 Twitter: @maor_x ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Works which can't be freely licensed
On Sunday, 22 February 2015, Milos Rancic mill...@gmail.com wrote: As some of you know, we are working on the project [1] with Matica srpska [2]. Basically, that opens numerous possibilities and here is one of them. My professor, a Board member of Matica srpska and one of two co-authors of the Normative Grammar of Serbian Language wants to open the Grammar. Before I continue, I want to explain how good faith academics and university professors in Serbia treat their work in relation to the open and free access (and I suppose it's quite common for any part of the world): * Personally, they are not motivated by money. They are well established socially, financially secure and they are mature people, not fascinated by luxury, living modest lives. * They want their works to be as much accessible as it's possible, as well as as much used by other scientists as it's possible. * The only financial issue in such circumstances is related to the financial safety of particular institution (in this case Matica srpska). However, financial gains from selling the books are relatively small, it's about capital works and having them is a kind of obligation of every intellectual in Serbia and it's questionable would they lose (small amount of) money by opening the content or they would actually gain. In other words, I am addressing this issue on the level of going slowly to the process and making financial analysis of every step. * They don't really get variety of the licensing options. For them, it's practically the same if it's CC-BY or Encarta web license. If they open content, their default is that they are not counting on money from published books. * The only issue which they have is to keep their integrity and not to present their work as their if it could be edited by anyone. (Thus, inclusion of the dictionaries will go in the form similar to Milos, based on Serbian Ornithological Dictionary.) And all of those things are clear while we are talking about regular content. What we have here is the *Normative* Grammar. From my perspective, that can't go under anything which doesn't assume ND part. Obviously to me, if something is prescriptive work, it should go as-is. I'm finding this a bit difficult to parse; am I interpreting it correctly if I read it as: because the project is to produce a prescriptive, normative grammar, there's a desired No Derivatives element of any adopted license to prevent the field from being populated with multiple, similar works that would confuse things and undermine the point of the project? However, that's my initial assumption. If there is an option to open it more freely, I'd be happy to hear the argumentation. [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:PEG/Interglider.ORG/Wiktionary_Meets_Matica_Srpska [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/en:Matica_srpska ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org javascript:; ?subject=unsubscribe -- Sent from my mobile computing device of Lovecraftian complexity and horror. ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] RfC: Works which can't be freely licensed
On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Oliver Keyes ironho...@gmail.com wrote: I'm finding this a bit difficult to parse; am I interpreting it correctly if I read it as: because the project is to produce a prescriptive, normative grammar, there's a desired No Derivatives element of any adopted license to prevent the field from being populated with multiple, similar works that would confuse things and undermine the point of the project? I would actually say: Is there a point to have a prescriptive work without ND clause? While it's quite fine for descriptive works -- and I am sure that at some point of time we'd get one of the descriptive grammars (at least the latest descriptive Syntax of Serbian Language, made by the same professor) -- I am doubtful about usefulness of a prescriptive work without ND. Which, actually, reminds me that we definitely need a non-free repository. For example, we could get that grammar to be quoted in whole, but there is no sense to change it. But, my initial point was: Am I missing something? Would there be any reason why such grammar would have sense without ND clause? ___ 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, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
