Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel

[Lila Tretikov]

We will check on both.

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 10:17 AM, rupert THURNER 
wrote:

> Lila, would you be able to somehow contact the Russian government?
> On Nov 23, 2015 18:25, "Samir Elsharbaty" 
> wrote:
>
> > Some suggestions of things we can do:
> >
> > 1. The list of signatories on the amnesty international website does not
> > include the WMF, the Wikimedia community, any of our affiliations or any
> > representation from the Wikimedia movement. I wonder if we can contact
> them
> > and request adding any of the above mentioned?
> >
> > 2. Use our SM channels to retweet the WMF blog post [1] about him with
> the
> > news that he is sentenced to death.
> >
> > 3. We all try to share supporting tweets on the #FreeBassel hashtag.
> >
> > [1] http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/10/08/bassel-missing-syria/
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Samir
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Lila Tretikov 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Gerard, this is devastating news. Please send our love to Bassel's
> > family.
> > > I still hope this is not true.
> > >
> > > If there is anything we can do from here please let us know.
> > > Lila
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> > > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hoi,
> > > > I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death.
> I
> > > read
> > > > it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him
> in
> > > the
> > > > past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.
> > > >
> > > > Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making
> information
> > > > available about Palmyra.
> > > >
> > > > If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >   GerardM
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
> > > > [2]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.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,
> > > 
> > >
> > ___
> > 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] Branislav Jovanovic, User:BraneJ in critical condition

[rupert THURNER]

All the best brane!!
On Nov 23, 2015 18:43, "Samir Elsharbaty"  wrote:

> Brane,
>
> I didn't have the pleasure of meeting you but I heard a lot of nice
> stories, so, please get well soon because I would like to have this
> pleasure!
>
> --
> Samir Elsharbaty,
> Wikipedia Education Program
> Wikimedia Foundation
> +20.100.944.3478
> education.wikimedia.org
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Brane,
> > Good wishes and get well soon.
> > Regards.
> >
> > On 22 November 2015 at 06:18, Asaf Bartov  wrote:
> >
> > > I have had the pleasure of meeting and talking to Brane at some length,
> > in
> > > Belgrade, in Hong Kong, and perhaps elsewhere too.  He is thoughtful
> and
> > > dedicated, and as Milos said, has played a huge part in building up
> > Serbian
> > > Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia.
> > >
> > > Brane, I wish you a full recovery, and hope to have the chance to see
> you
> > > again, somewhere in the world or around the wikis.
> > >
> > > Regards from the Wikisource gathering in Vienna,
> > >
> > > Asaf
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Milos Rancic 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Pine asked me a good question: Where to express support? I think
> > > > whatever you think is the most appropriate. This thread works, as
> > > > well. His email is bra...@gmail.com. You have the link to his
> Facebook
> > > > page via WMRS photo. He is using Twitter, as well @branej.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Milos Rancic 
> > > wrote:
> > > > > At some point of time, the best you could do is to reach for a
> > > > > superstition and hope it will work. It doesn't matter how it will
> be
> > > > > explained after, but at this point of time, it's only that
> > > > > superstition which matters.
> > > > >
> > > > > My particular superstition is that Brane would be able to see his
> > > > > eulogy and that we'll be able to laugh together. You know, it's a
> > rare
> > > > > opportunity to see how your eulogy would look like, so I hope I am
> > > > > giving it to him.
> > > > >
> > > > > An hour ago I heard that he is in critical condition. At first, I
> was
> > > > > thinking what should I write after he dies. Then, I realized that I
> > > > > should write it now and post it after. Then, it's come into my mind
> > > > > that I should send it immediately as, at least, I could think about
> > > > > reading with him this eulogy and your comments after he recovers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since August 2014 he is struggling with bone cancer. His curse is
> > that
> > > > > his body is so strong, that chemotherapy is not working yet.
> > > > > Paradoxically, we hope that his body is weak enough now that it
> will
> > > > > finally accept chemotherapy. Monday would be crucial day for him.
> > > > >
> > > > > He is one of those "invisible" Wikimedians who actually contributed
> > > > > significantly to our movement. Some of you, mostly those who
> visited
> > > > > Belgrade, know him.
> > > > >
> > > > > He is one of the founders of Wikimedia Serbia. It's a pity that he
> is
> > > > > in this condition while WMRS is preparing to celebrate its 10th
> > > > > anniversary. Here is our photo from the founding assembly [1].
> > > > >
> > > > > Presently, he is a board member of Wikimedia Serbia.
> > > > >
> > > > > His epic fight for copyright correctness on Serbian Wikipedia
> created
> > > > > the foundations of the present day strict copyright rules. It's a
> > > > > great achievement for a project of such size and it was possible
> just
> > > > > because of him.
> > > > >
> > > > > While he was active editor, he was highly trusted Wikipedian and he
> > > > > was administrator, bureaucrat and checkuser on Serbian Wikipedia,
> as
> > > > > well as on a number of of other projects in Serbian language.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alpha software for transliteration between Cyrillic and Latin
> scripts
> > > > > of Serbian language in MediaWiki was his work. That was the basis
> for
> > > > > the future implementation. It was the first software of that kind
> > > > > implemented in one web engine.
> > > > >
> > > > > He is my close friend. Besides a lot of things which he did, which
> > > > > will be mentioned at appropriate time, I want to say that many
> things
> > > > > which I did wouldn't be possible without his contribution.
> > > > >
> > > > > He is now very exhausted and he won't be able to read this today or
> > > > > tomorrow. However, I am sure he will be able to read it on Monday,
> > > > > after he recovers a bit. So, your support matters, no matter of my
> > > > > superstitious reasons for sending this email.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://www.facebook.com/wikimedia.rs/photos/a.826279217387658.1073741828.294923960523189/1198903920125184/
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel

[rupert THURNER]

Lila, would you be able to somehow contact the Russian government?
On Nov 23, 2015 18:25, "Samir Elsharbaty"  wrote:

> Some suggestions of things we can do:
>
> 1. The list of signatories on the amnesty international website does not
> include the WMF, the Wikimedia community, any of our affiliations or any
> representation from the Wikimedia movement. I wonder if we can contact them
> and request adding any of the above mentioned?
>
> 2. Use our SM channels to retweet the WMF blog post [1] about him with the
> news that he is sentenced to death.
>
> 3. We all try to share supporting tweets on the #FreeBassel hashtag.
>
> [1] http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/10/08/bassel-missing-syria/
>
> Thanks,
>
> Samir
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
>
> > Gerard, this is devastating news. Please send our love to Bassel's
> family.
> > I still hope this is not true.
> >
> > If there is anything we can do from here please let us know.
> > Lila
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hoi,
> > > I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death. I
> > read
> > > it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him in
> > the
> > > past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.
> > >
> > > Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making information
> > > available about Palmyra.
> > >
> > > If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
> > > Thanks,
> > >   GerardM
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
> > > [2]
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.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,
> > 
> >
> ___
> 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] Free Bassel

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death. I read
it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him in the
past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.

Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making information
available about Palmyra.

If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
Thanks,
  GerardM

[1]
http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
[2]
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.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] Quality issues

[Leila Zia]

Hi Andreas,

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> Moreover, I was somewhat surprised to learn the other day that, apparently,
> over 80 percent of Wikidata statements are either unreferenced or only
> referenced to a Wikipedia:
>
>
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Citing_as_a_public_service.pdf=17
>
> That seems like a recipe for disaster, given that Wikidata feeds the Google
> Knowledge Graph and Bing Satori to some extent.
>
> Thoughts?
>

Here are my thoughts:

1) No, it's not a recipe for disaster. :-) I expand below.

2) People sit at the different parts of the spectrum when it comes to the
issues around Wikidata references. What almost all these people have in
common is that they know having references is a very valuable thing for
Wikidata (or any other knowledge base for that matter).

3) As a researcher, as long as the data is in Wikidata, with or without a
reference, I'm already some steps ahead. If there is no reference, I have a
starting point to look for a reference for that specific value, and in that
process, I may find conflicting data with new references. For a project in
a growing stage, these are opportunities, not blockers.

4) I hear a lot of sensitivity about referencing Wikidata claim values to
Wikipedia. I hear people's concerns (having loops in referencing mechanisms
is not good) but I do not consider the existence of Wikipedia references an
issue and I certainly prefer a Wikipedia reference over no reference,
especially if the date the information was extracted at is also tracked
somewhere in Wikidata. Giving information to the researcher that the data
has come from Wikipedia will give him/her a head-start about where to
continue the search.

5) I see a need to give the users of open data a chance to use data with
more knowledge and control. For example, if you are an app developer, you
should be able to figure out relatively easily what data in Wikidata you
can fully trust, and what data you may want to skip using in your app. At
the moment, some part of the community considers a value with a non-
Wikipedia reference approved/monitored by a human as trustworthy (this is
no written rule, I'm summarizing my current understanding based on
discussions with some of the Wikidata community members, including myself
:-). But, among other things, the reference in Wikidata may not be a
trustworthy reference. We should surface how much trust one should have in
the values in Wikidata to the end-user.

What is amazing is: There are many great things one can do based on the
data that is being gathered in Wikidata. We should all work together to
improve that data, but we should also acknowledge that our attention is
split across many projects (this is definitely the case for me), and as a
result, we will be seeing steady and smooth improvements in Wikidata, and
not sudden and very fast improvements. We need to stay curious, excited,
committed, and patient. :-)

Leila

Disclaimer: These are my personal views about references in Wikidata, and
not necessarily the views of my team or the 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] Quality issues

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:37 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:

> 5.People need to able to trust all data in WikiData, otherwise they just
> wont use it because as Wikidata expands the same PR firms, interest groups
> which have seen so many of WP issues will gravitate to the easier to
> manipulate WikiData
>


I think the potential problem here is far worse: people *will use* the
data, because their lack of trustworthiness, as amply described in the
Wikidata disclaimer[1], is no longer visible when they're displayed as
"fact" by dominant search engines.

Google is already committed to Wikidata. Wikidata is in part a Google
project. This means information placed in Wikidata may in time have the
potential to reach an audience of billions – a far greater audience than
Wikipedia has.

People already blindly copy falsehoods from Wikipedia today, because
important caveats (like checking the sourcing to assess the reliability of
a Wikipedia article) are widely ignored. As a result, circular references
and citogenesis have become a significant problem for Wikipedia.

People are far more likely still to copy blindly from Google. It's circular
referencing on steroids.

The way things are headed, manipulations in Wikidata that enter the Google
Knowledge Graph, Bing Satori, etc. could end up having far greater leverage
than any Wikipedia manipulation has ever had. In the worst-case scenario –
depending on how much search engines will come to rely on Wikidata – an
edit war won by anonymous players in an obscure corner of Wikidata might
literally redefine truth for the English-speaking internet.

Is this really a good thing? Are checks and balances in place to prevent
this from happening?



> Lets build something based on the lessons learnt on Wikipedia over the last
> 15 years rather than duplicate those missteps
>


That seems like good advice to me. The online world's information
infrastructure shouldn't be built on sand.


[1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:General_disclaimer – highlights:
"Wikidata cannot guarantee the validity of the information found here.
[...] No formal peer review[:] Wikidata does not have an executive editor
or editorial board that vets content before it is published. Our active
community of editors uses tools such as the Special:Recentchanges and
Special:Newpages feeds to monitor new and changing content. However,
Wikidata is not uniformly peer reviewed; while readers may correct errors
or engage in casual peer review, they have no legal duty to do so and thus
all information read here is without any implied warranty of fitness for
any purpose or use whatsoever. None of the contributors, sponsors,
administrators or anyone else connected with Wikidata in any way whatsoever
can be responsible for the appearance of any inaccurate or libelous
information or for your use of the information contained in or linked from
these web pages [...] neither is anyone at Wikidata responsible should
someone change, edit, modify or remove any information that you may post on
Wikidata or any of its associated projects."
___
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] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

[Lila Tretikov]

We fully acknowledge the issue with the shortened AP review this year and
are committed to the 30 day review going forward. Since the overall issue
has been noted since as far back as 2012 we are doing a review of our
process in comparison to the FDC standards to build best practices going
forward. You can add you comments here to help guide the conversation:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)#Annual_Plan

Lila



On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Craig Franklin 
wrote:

> I likewise appreciate the strong language on the situation with the WMF;
> the general opacity and vagueness of public budget plans (especially
> considering the requirements for affiliate organisations in this area) is
> something that has been widely noted on this list and elsewhere, and to my
> mind not answered in a satisfactory way.  It is good to see a fearless FDC
> that is prepared to "tell it as it is", and make sure that this problem is
> receiving continued attention.
>
> It is my hope that the Foundation will address the issues raised here in a
> constructive and transparent manner, rather than ignoring them or trying to
> spin them away.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
>
> On 24 November 2015 at 12:04, Pine W  wrote:
>
> > Thank you FDC.
> >
> > Many of the small and midsized APG requests fared well in this round.
> That
> > is nice to see.
> >
> > I find it concerning that the larger the organization, the more problems
> > the FDC  seemed to find with the org's budget and performance management
> > practices. One would expect the larger organizations to have mature and
> > robust practices in these areas. Regarding WMF in particular, my concerns
> > about its budget practices are well documented and I appreciate that the
> > FDC is also taking note of the persistence of the problems. I hope that
> WMF
> > will get serious about its financial transpatency.
> >
> > A couple of questions about Wikidata:
> >
> > I'm confused about the funding for Wikidata. In one place the FDC says
> that
> > "Nonetheless, the FDC is exasperated by the inability of WMDE to to
> > disaggregate the costs of Wikidata from other projects." and in another
> > place the FDC says that "We have recommended a reduced amount for WMDE in
> > this round with the expectation that WMDE will not cut Wikidata or their
> > other tech development work, but will instead find cost savings elsewhere
> > in its annual plan." If the FDC wants a disaggregated budget (which is
> > understandable) then why is the FDC expecting WMDE to dip into its other
> > funds and/or make cuts elsewhere in order to cover the work in this
> > proposal that the FDC is declining to fund in this proposal? This
> > expectation seems to be a bit of a contradiction.
> >
> > I'm also wondering how WMDE is able to submit a dedicated request for
> > restricted funding for Wikidata if the Wikidata project is so integrated
> > into WMDE's other budgets that the FDC finds the integration to be
> > problematic. Can the FDC or our colleagues at WMDE explain this?
> >
> > Wikidata is a high profile project with a good reputation, and I hope
> that
> > the issues can be resolved soon.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Pine
> > On Nov 23, 2015 14:09, "matanya moses"  wrote:
> >
> > > Hello Wikimedians,
> > >
> > > tl;dr: The FDC’s recommendations for this round of the APG grant
> requests
> > > have now been published at:
> > >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round1
> > >
> > > The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meets twice a year to help make
> > > decisions about how to effectively allocate movement funds to achieve
> the
> > > Wikimedia movement's mission, vision, and strategy. [1] We met for four
> > > days last week in San Francisco to review 11 proposals submitted for
> this
> > > round of funding. [2]
> > >
> > > The committee has now posted our Round 1 2015-2016 recommendations on
> the
> > > annual plan grants (APG) to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
> > [3]
> > > The WMF Board representatives to the FDC (Denny Vrandecic, Jan-Bart de
> > > Vreede and Dariusz Jemielniak) will lead the Board in its review of
> these
> > > recommendations. The WMF Board will review the recommendations and then
> > > make their decision on them before 1 January 2016.
> > >
> > > This round, the eleven proposals came from ten chapters and one
> thematic
> > > organisation, totaling requests of approximately $3.8 million USD. Ten
> > > affiliates were returning to the APG program, and one was a new
> > applicant.
> > > This round, one organisation requested a restricted grant to support
> one
> > > particular program. All other grant requests were for general funding.
> > >
> > > Before we met for our face-to-face deliberations, the FDC carefully
> > > reviewed all proposals and supporting documentation (e.g., budgets,
> > plans,
> > > strategies) in detail, aided by 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

[Brandon Harris]

Could you answer this question in plain language, please, as this 
answer feels like a "kiss off".


> On Nov 23, 2015, at 8:27 PM, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
> 
> We fully acknowledge the issue with the shortened AP review this year and
> are committed to the 30 day review going forward. Since the overall issue
> has been noted since as far back as 2012 we are doing a review of our
> process in comparison to the FDC standards to build best practices going
> forward. You can add you comments here to help guide the conversation:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)#Annual_Plan
> 
> Lila
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Craig Franklin 
> wrote:
> 
>> I likewise appreciate the strong language on the situation with the WMF;
>> the general opacity and vagueness of public budget plans (especially
>> considering the requirements for affiliate organisations in this area) is
>> something that has been widely noted on this list and elsewhere, and to my
>> mind not answered in a satisfactory way.  It is good to see a fearless FDC
>> that is prepared to "tell it as it is", and make sure that this problem is
>> receiving continued attention.
>> 
>> It is my hope that the Foundation will address the issues raised here in a
>> constructive and transparent manner, rather than ignoring them or trying to
>> spin them away.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Craig
>> 
>> On 24 November 2015 at 12:04, Pine W  wrote:
>> 
>>> Thank you FDC.
>>> 
>>> Many of the small and midsized APG requests fared well in this round.
>> That
>>> is nice to see.
>>> 
>>> I find it concerning that the larger the organization, the more problems
>>> the FDC  seemed to find with the org's budget and performance management
>>> practices. One would expect the larger organizations to have mature and
>>> robust practices in these areas. Regarding WMF in particular, my concerns
>>> about its budget practices are well documented and I appreciate that the
>>> FDC is also taking note of the persistence of the problems. I hope that
>> WMF
>>> will get serious about its financial transpatency.
>>> 
>>> A couple of questions about Wikidata:
>>> 
>>> I'm confused about the funding for Wikidata. In one place the FDC says
>> that
>>> "Nonetheless, the FDC is exasperated by the inability of WMDE to to
>>> disaggregate the costs of Wikidata from other projects." and in another
>>> place the FDC says that "We have recommended a reduced amount for WMDE in
>>> this round with the expectation that WMDE will not cut Wikidata or their
>>> other tech development work, but will instead find cost savings elsewhere
>>> in its annual plan." If the FDC wants a disaggregated budget (which is
>>> understandable) then why is the FDC expecting WMDE to dip into its other
>>> funds and/or make cuts elsewhere in order to cover the work in this
>>> proposal that the FDC is declining to fund in this proposal? This
>>> expectation seems to be a bit of a contradiction.
>>> 
>>> I'm also wondering how WMDE is able to submit a dedicated request for
>>> restricted funding for Wikidata if the Wikidata project is so integrated
>>> into WMDE's other budgets that the FDC finds the integration to be
>>> problematic. Can the FDC or our colleagues at WMDE explain this?
>>> 
>>> Wikidata is a high profile project with a good reputation, and I hope
>> that
>>> the issues can be resolved soon.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Pine
>>> On Nov 23, 2015 14:09, "matanya moses"  wrote:
>>> 
 Hello Wikimedians,
 
 tl;dr: The FDC’s recommendations for this round of the APG grant
>> requests
 have now been published at:
 
>>> 
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round1
 
 The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meets twice a year to help make
 decisions about how to effectively allocate movement funds to achieve
>> the
 Wikimedia movement's mission, vision, and strategy. [1] We met for four
 days last week in San Francisco to review 11 proposals submitted for
>> this
 round of funding. [2]
 
 The committee has now posted our Round 1 2015-2016 recommendations on
>> the
 annual plan grants (APG) to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
>>> [3]
 The WMF Board representatives to the FDC (Denny Vrandecic, Jan-Bart de
 Vreede and Dariusz Jemielniak) will lead the Board in its review of
>> these
 recommendations. The WMF Board will review the recommendations and then
 make their decision on them before 1 January 2016.
 
 This round, the eleven proposals came from ten chapters and one
>> thematic
 organisation, totaling requests of approximately $3.8 million USD. Ten
 affiliates were returning to the APG program, and one was a new
>>> applicant.
 This round, one organisation requested a restricted grant to support
>> one
 particular program. All other grant 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

[Craig Franklin]

I likewise appreciate the strong language on the situation with the WMF;
the general opacity and vagueness of public budget plans (especially
considering the requirements for affiliate organisations in this area) is
something that has been widely noted on this list and elsewhere, and to my
mind not answered in a satisfactory way.  It is good to see a fearless FDC
that is prepared to "tell it as it is", and make sure that this problem is
receiving continued attention.

It is my hope that the Foundation will address the issues raised here in a
constructive and transparent manner, rather than ignoring them or trying to
spin them away.

Cheers,
Craig

On 24 November 2015 at 12:04, Pine W  wrote:

> Thank you FDC.
>
> Many of the small and midsized APG requests fared well in this round. That
> is nice to see.
>
> I find it concerning that the larger the organization, the more problems
> the FDC  seemed to find with the org's budget and performance management
> practices. One would expect the larger organizations to have mature and
> robust practices in these areas. Regarding WMF in particular, my concerns
> about its budget practices are well documented and I appreciate that the
> FDC is also taking note of the persistence of the problems. I hope that WMF
> will get serious about its financial transpatency.
>
> A couple of questions about Wikidata:
>
> I'm confused about the funding for Wikidata. In one place the FDC says that
> "Nonetheless, the FDC is exasperated by the inability of WMDE to to
> disaggregate the costs of Wikidata from other projects." and in another
> place the FDC says that "We have recommended a reduced amount for WMDE in
> this round with the expectation that WMDE will not cut Wikidata or their
> other tech development work, but will instead find cost savings elsewhere
> in its annual plan." If the FDC wants a disaggregated budget (which is
> understandable) then why is the FDC expecting WMDE to dip into its other
> funds and/or make cuts elsewhere in order to cover the work in this
> proposal that the FDC is declining to fund in this proposal? This
> expectation seems to be a bit of a contradiction.
>
> I'm also wondering how WMDE is able to submit a dedicated request for
> restricted funding for Wikidata if the Wikidata project is so integrated
> into WMDE's other budgets that the FDC finds the integration to be
> problematic. Can the FDC or our colleagues at WMDE explain this?
>
> Wikidata is a high profile project with a good reputation, and I hope that
> the issues can be resolved soon.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pine
> On Nov 23, 2015 14:09, "matanya moses"  wrote:
>
> > Hello Wikimedians,
> >
> > tl;dr: The FDC’s recommendations for this round of the APG grant requests
> > have now been published at:
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round1
> >
> > The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meets twice a year to help make
> > decisions about how to effectively allocate movement funds to achieve the
> > Wikimedia movement's mission, vision, and strategy. [1] We met for four
> > days last week in San Francisco to review 11 proposals submitted for this
> > round of funding. [2]
> >
> > The committee has now posted our Round 1 2015-2016 recommendations on the
> > annual plan grants (APG) to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.
> [3]
> > The WMF Board representatives to the FDC (Denny Vrandecic, Jan-Bart de
> > Vreede and Dariusz Jemielniak) will lead the Board in its review of these
> > recommendations. The WMF Board will review the recommendations and then
> > make their decision on them before 1 January 2016.
> >
> > This round, the eleven proposals came from ten chapters and one thematic
> > organisation, totaling requests of approximately $3.8 million USD. Ten
> > affiliates were returning to the APG program, and one was a new
> applicant.
> > This round, one organisation requested a restricted grant to support one
> > particular program. All other grant requests were for general funding.
> >
> > Before we met for our face-to-face deliberations, the FDC carefully
> > reviewed all proposals and supporting documentation (e.g., budgets,
> plans,
> > strategies) in detail, aided by staff assessments and analysis on impact,
> > finances, and programs, as well as community comments on the proposals.
> The
> > committee had long and intense conversations about the proposals
> submitted
> > this round. By listening and carefully considering all available data,
> the
> > committee achieved consensus on all proposal deliberations.
> >
> > In addition to the above, the FDC has also included a recommendation
> about
> > the WMF itself to improve its own level of planning transparency and
> budget
> > detail. The WMF staff were not involved in the conception or writing of
> > this additional recommendation.
> >
> > For your reference, there is a formal process to submit appeals about
> > these 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Gnangarra]

some resposnes to Leila comments

1. Its not a disaster but it is a serious concern, we know from past
experiences that it goes to the heart of the projects long term
credibility, Countless hours and funds have gone into redressing Wikipedias
reputation and still after  8 years of doing this we get bagged, we are
still answering these questions. why send Wikidata done that  track when we
all understand the importance of referencing or in more theological
perspective "if we cant learn from history, why do we spend so many
resources recording history"

2. referencing is a very valuable thing for all data, that should be a
starting point for the spectrum and Wikidata, rather than a goal or end
point. Wikipeidas still have unreferenced material 15 years after it started

3. I'd disagree if the data isnt referenced then its of no value,
Wikipedias are a better place to look

4.Wikipedia reference isnt ideal but it is better than nothing, providing
that reference is to a permanent link rather than just a article at least
then if the information is changed there is some ability to recover the
original source.  In general a circular reference is a bad out come

5.People need to able to trust all data in WikiData, otherwise they just
wont use it because as Wikidata expands the same PR firms, interest groups
which have seen so many of WP issues will gravitate to the easier to
manipulate WikiData


Lets build something based on the lessons learnt on Wikipedia over the last
15 years rather than duplicate those missteps



On 24 November 2015 at 06:18, Leila Zia  wrote:

> Hi Andreas,
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:
>
> > Moreover, I was somewhat surprised to learn the other day that,
> apparently,
> > over 80 percent of Wikidata statements are either unreferenced or only
> > referenced to a Wikipedia:
> >
> >
> >
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Citing_as_a_public_service.pdf=17
> >
> > That seems like a recipe for disaster, given that Wikidata feeds the
> Google
> > Knowledge Graph and Bing Satori to some extent.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
>
> Here are my thoughts:
>
> 1) No, it's not a recipe for disaster. :-) I expand below.
>
> 2) People sit at the different parts of the spectrum when it comes to the
> issues around Wikidata references. What almost all these people have in
> common is that they know having references is a very valuable thing for
> Wikidata (or any other knowledge base for that matter).
>
> 3) As a researcher, as long as the data is in Wikidata, with or without a
> reference, I'm already some steps ahead. If there is no reference, I have a
> starting point to look for a reference for that specific value, and in that
> process, I may find conflicting data with new references. For a project in
> a growing stage, these are opportunities, not blockers.
>
> 4) I hear a lot of sensitivity about referencing Wikidata claim values to
> Wikipedia. I hear people's concerns (having loops in referencing mechanisms
> is not good) but I do not consider the existence of Wikipedia references an
> issue and I certainly prefer a Wikipedia reference over no reference,
> especially if the date the information was extracted at is also tracked
> somewhere in Wikidata. Giving information to the researcher that the data
> has come from Wikipedia will give him/her a head-start about where to
> continue the search.
>
> 5) I see a need to give the users of open data a chance to use data with
> more knowledge and control. For example, if you are an app developer, you
> should be able to figure out relatively easily what data in Wikidata you
> can fully trust, and what data you may want to skip using in your app. At
> the moment, some part of the community considers a value with a non-
> Wikipedia reference approved/monitored by a human as trustworthy (this is
> no written rule, I'm summarizing my current understanding based on
> discussions with some of the Wikidata community members, including myself
> :-). But, among other things, the reference in Wikidata may not be a
> trustworthy reference. We should surface how much trust one should have in
> the values in Wikidata to the end-user.
>
> What is amazing is: There are many great things one can do based on the
> data that is being gathered in Wikidata. We should all work together to
> improve that data, but we should also acknowledge that our attention is
> split across many projects (this is definitely the case for me), and as a
> result, we will be seeing steady and smooth improvements in Wikidata, and
> not sudden and very fast improvements. We need to stay curious, excited,
> committed, and patient. :-)
>
> Leila
>
> Disclaimer: These are my personal views about references in Wikidata, and
> not necessarily the views of my team or the Wikimedia Foundation. :-)
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

[Pine W]

Thank you FDC.

Many of the small and midsized APG requests fared well in this round. That
is nice to see.

I find it concerning that the larger the organization, the more problems
the FDC  seemed to find with the org's budget and performance management
practices. One would expect the larger organizations to have mature and
robust practices in these areas. Regarding WMF in particular, my concerns
about its budget practices are well documented and I appreciate that the
FDC is also taking note of the persistence of the problems. I hope that WMF
will get serious about its financial transpatency.

A couple of questions about Wikidata:

I'm confused about the funding for Wikidata. In one place the FDC says that
"Nonetheless, the FDC is exasperated by the inability of WMDE to to
disaggregate the costs of Wikidata from other projects." and in another
place the FDC says that "We have recommended a reduced amount for WMDE in
this round with the expectation that WMDE will not cut Wikidata or their
other tech development work, but will instead find cost savings elsewhere
in its annual plan." If the FDC wants a disaggregated budget (which is
understandable) then why is the FDC expecting WMDE to dip into its other
funds and/or make cuts elsewhere in order to cover the work in this
proposal that the FDC is declining to fund in this proposal? This
expectation seems to be a bit of a contradiction.

I'm also wondering how WMDE is able to submit a dedicated request for
restricted funding for Wikidata if the Wikidata project is so integrated
into WMDE's other budgets that the FDC finds the integration to be
problematic. Can the FDC or our colleagues at WMDE explain this?

Wikidata is a high profile project with a good reputation, and I hope that
the issues can be resolved soon.

Thanks,

Pine
On Nov 23, 2015 14:09, "matanya moses"  wrote:

> Hello Wikimedians,
>
> tl;dr: The FDC’s recommendations for this round of the APG grant requests
> have now been published at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round1
>
> The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meets twice a year to help make
> decisions about how to effectively allocate movement funds to achieve the
> Wikimedia movement's mission, vision, and strategy. [1] We met for four
> days last week in San Francisco to review 11 proposals submitted for this
> round of funding. [2]
>
> The committee has now posted our Round 1 2015-2016 recommendations on the
> annual plan grants (APG) to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees. [3]
> The WMF Board representatives to the FDC (Denny Vrandecic, Jan-Bart de
> Vreede and Dariusz Jemielniak) will lead the Board in its review of these
> recommendations. The WMF Board will review the recommendations and then
> make their decision on them before 1 January 2016.
>
> This round, the eleven proposals came from ten chapters and one thematic
> organisation, totaling requests of approximately $3.8 million USD. Ten
> affiliates were returning to the APG program, and one was a new applicant.
> This round, one organisation requested a restricted grant to support one
> particular program. All other grant requests were for general funding.
>
> Before we met for our face-to-face deliberations, the FDC carefully
> reviewed all proposals and supporting documentation (e.g., budgets, plans,
> strategies) in detail, aided by staff assessments and analysis on impact,
> finances, and programs, as well as community comments on the proposals. The
> committee had long and intense conversations about the proposals submitted
> this round. By listening and carefully considering all available data, the
> committee achieved consensus on all proposal deliberations.
>
> In addition to the above, the FDC has also included a recommendation about
> the WMF itself to improve its own level of planning transparency and budget
> detail. The WMF staff were not involved in the conception or writing of
> this additional recommendation.
>
> For your reference, there is a formal process to submit appeals about
> these recommendations or complaints about the FDC process. The processes
> for both are outlined below.
>
> Any applicant that wants to appeal the FDC’s recommendation about their
> proposal this round should submit it by 23:59 UTC on 8 December 2015 in
> accordance with the appeal process outlined in the FDC Framework. A formal
> appeal to challenge the FDC’s recommendation should be in the form of a
> 500-or-fewer word summary. The appeal should be submitted on-wiki, [4] and
> must be submitted by the Board Chair of a funding-seeking applicant.
>
> Complaints about the process can be filed by anyone with the Ombudsperson,
> and can be made any time. The complaint should be submitted on wiki, as
> well. [5] The ombudsperson will publicly document the complaint, and
> investigate as needed.
>
> Please take a look at the upcoming calendar [6] to learn about other
> upcoming milestones in the APG 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

[Risker]

On 23 November 2015 at 21:04, Pine W  wrote:

> Thank you FDC.
>
> Many of the small and midsized APG requests fared well in this round. That
> is nice to see.
>
> I find it concerning that the larger the organization, the more problems
> the FDC  seemed to find with the org's budget and performance management
> practices. One would expect the larger organizations to have mature and
> robust practices in these areas. Regarding WMF in particular, my concerns
> about its budget practices are well documented and I appreciate that the
> FDC is also taking note of the persistence of the problems. I hope that WMF
> will get serious about its financial transpatency.
>
> A couple of questions about Wikidata:
>
> I'm confused about the funding for Wikidata. In one place the FDC says that
> "Nonetheless, the FDC is exasperated by the inability of WMDE to to
> disaggregate the costs of Wikidata from other projects." and in another
> place the FDC says that "We have recommended a reduced amount for WMDE in
> this round with the expectation that WMDE will not cut Wikidata or their
> other tech development work, but will instead find cost savings elsewhere
> in its annual plan." If the FDC wants a disaggregated budget (which is
> understandable) then why is the FDC expecting WMDE to dip into its other
> funds and/or make cuts elsewhere in order to cover the work in this
> proposal that the FDC is declining to fund in this proposal? This
> expectation seems to be a bit of a contradiction.
>
> I'm also wondering how WMDE is able to submit a dedicated request for
> restricted funding for Wikidata if the Wikidata project is so integrated
> into WMDE's other budgets that the FDC finds the integration to be
> problematic. Can the FDC or our colleagues at WMDE explain this?
>
> Wikidata is a high profile project with a good reputation, and I hope that
> the issues can be resolved soon.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Pine
>


Thank you for your question, Pine.  WMDE did not submit a restricted grant
request for Wikidata. WMDE submitted a restricted grant request for
Wikidata and other software projects, and then said that it was not able to
disaggregate the budgets for each of these two separate projects.  Most
other proposals were able to provide greater detail on the cost of
individual programs within their proposal, despite the fact that they
sought dramatically fewer resources.  As well, the Wikidata project
specifically is working toward a direct funding package with the WMF, and
it will be essential for those costs to be clearly disaggregated in order
for this to happen.  They will not be able to include the costs of other
programs in that agreement, and they will have to be able to more
accurately apportion costs such as rent, administrative overhead, supplies
and services.

In addition, it has sectioned off the majority of its budget from direct
FDC input, stating that it is not seeking Annual Plan Grant (APG) funding
for that portion of its budget.  Nonetheless, that budget is paid for out
of money intended for the growth of the movement.  FDC members were able to
identify several points in that aspect of the WMDE annual plan that appear
to be disproportionately funded compared to similar programs from other
chapters, and the FDC believed that there are plenty of opportunities for
cost saving in the administrative and other areas that would ensure funding
for the planned software development which is intended to provide benefit
to both the local editing community and the Wikimedia movement.

I will note that I am going to post the same response to Marcus Cyron's
comments on the talk page[1], as I believe his comments are in a similar
vein.

User:Risker - FDC member


[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants_talk:APG/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round1
___
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] Quality issues

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
To start of, results from the past are no indications of results in the
future. It is the disclaimer insurance companies have to state in all their
adverts in the Netherlands. When you continue and make it a "theological"
issue, you lose me because I am not of this faith, far from it. Wikidata is
its own project and it is utterly dissimilar from Wikipedia.To start of
Wikidata has been a certified success from the start. The improvement it
brought by bringing all interwiki links together is enormous.That alone
should be a pointer that Wikipedia think is not realistic.

To continue, people have been importing data into Wikidata from the start.
They are the statements you know and, it was possible  to import them from
Wikipedia because of these interwiki links. So when you call for sources,
it is fairly save to assume that those imports are supported by the quality
of the statements of the Wikipedias and if anything, that is also where
they typically fail because many assumptions at Wikipedia are plain wrong
at Wikidata. For instance a listed building is not the organisation the
building is known for. At Wikidata they each need their own item and
associated statements.

Wikidata is already a success for other reasons. VIAF no longer links to
Wikipedia but to Wikidata. The biggest benefit of this move is for people
who are not interested in English.  Because of this change VIAF links
through Wikidata to all Wikipedias not only en.wp. Consequently people may
find through VIAF Wikipedia articles in their own language through their
library systems.

So do not forget about Wikipedia and the lessons learned. These lessons are
important to Wikipedia. However, they do not necessarily apply to Wikidata
particularly when you approach Wikidata as an opportunity to do things in a
different way. Set theory, a branch of mathematics, is exactly what we
need. When we have data at Wikidata of a given quality.. eg 90% and we have
data at another source with a given quality eg 90%, we can compare the two
and find a subset where the two sources do not match. When we curate the
differences, it is highly likely that we improve quality at Wikidata or at
the other source. With a proper workflow and an iterative approach to
multiple sources, we will spend time adding sources and improving quality.
This is more productive than religiously adding sources for every
statement. It also brings us better information in less time. I hope this
will help people understand that Wikidata is not Wikipedia and, that is a
good thing.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 24 November 2015 at 00:37, Gnangarra  wrote:

> some resposnes to Leila comments
>
> 1. Its not a disaster but it is a serious concern, we know from past
> experiences that it goes to the heart of the projects long term
> credibility, Countless hours and funds have gone into redressing Wikipedias
> reputation and still after  8 years of doing this we get bagged, we are
> still answering these questions. why send Wikidata done that  track when we
> all understand the importance of referencing or in more theological
> perspective "if we cant learn from history, why do we spend so many
> resources recording history"
>
> 2. referencing is a very valuable thing for all data, that should be a
> starting point for the spectrum and Wikidata, rather than a goal or end
> point. Wikipeidas still have unreferenced material 15 years after it
> started
>
> 3. I'd disagree if the data isnt referenced then its of no value,
> Wikipedias are a better place to look
>
> 4.Wikipedia reference isnt ideal but it is better than nothing, providing
> that reference is to a permanent link rather than just a article at least
> then if the information is changed there is some ability to recover the
> original source.  In general a circular reference is a bad out come
>
> 5.People need to able to trust all data in WikiData, otherwise they just
> wont use it because as Wikidata expands the same PR firms, interest groups
> which have seen so many of WP issues will gravitate to the easier to
> manipulate WikiData
>
>
> Lets build something based on the lessons learnt on Wikipedia over the last
> 15 years rather than duplicate those missteps
>
>
>
> On 24 November 2015 at 06:18, Leila Zia  wrote:
>
> > Hi Andreas,
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:15 PM, Andreas Kolbe 
> wrote:
> >
> > > Moreover, I was somewhat surprised to learn the other day that,
> > apparently,
> > > over 80 percent of Wikidata statements are either unreferenced or only
> > > referenced to a Wikipedia:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datei:Citing_as_a_public_service.pdf=17
> > >
> > > That seems like a recipe for disaster, given that Wikidata feeds the
> > Google
> > > Knowledge Graph and Bing Satori to some extent.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> >
> > Here are my thoughts:
> >
> > 1) No, it's not a recipe for disaster. :-) I expand below.
> >
> > 2) 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Sorry but in my opinion there seems to be a lack of urgency. An update to
an old blogpost when someone is sentenced to death? Is that all?REALLY

At this time we can make a big issue out of it by asking attention for
Bassel from our Central Notice. It is after all the first time that a
Wikipedian is likely to die for the things that we value... What is the
value of a life, of a Wikipedian of someone from Syria?

We need to do much better than this. This is a Wikipedian. It is a notable
person in his own right and we sit on our hands?

GerardM

On 23 November 2015 at 22:16, Jeff Elder  wrote:

> Hi Samir and all,
>
> We are happy to continue posting about Bassel, with all our hopes that he
> emerges OK.
>
> We posted about this latest development when it was first reported a few
> weeks ago. This morning we updated our blog post
>  and reshared
> it  out on
> Twitter
> and Facebook .
> I also RT'd Creative Commons, who posted about it, and with whom we've been
> in touch on this. And we have posted Noura's video
>  on Facebook. (It's media of
> the day on Wikimedia Commons.) I'll tweet the video later today and stay in
> touch with other orgs on Twitter posting about him.
>
> Keeping Bassel in our thoughts,
>
> Jeff Elder
> Digital communications manager
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 704-650-4130
> @jeffelder 
> @wikipedia 
> The Wikimedia blog 
>
> Jeff Elder
> Digital communications manager
> Wikimedia Foundation
> 704-650-4130
> @jeffelder 
> @wikipedia 
> The Wikimedia blog 
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Satdeep Gill 
> wrote:
>
> > This is such a sad news. I have been following news about him and i can't
> > believe this. This is a black day in the history of Human Civilization.
> We
> > can indeed do little things like sharing posts about him and writing
> about
> > him because that is all we can do perhaps.
> >
> > Regards
> > Satdeep Gill
> > Punjabi Wikimedians
> >
> > > On 23-Nov-2015, at 8:36 PM, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
> > >wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > >wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > > than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
> > >
> > >
> > > Today's Topics:
> > >
> > >   1. Re: Free Bassel (Lila Tretikov)
> > >   2. Re: Free Bassel (Samir Elsharbaty)
> > >   3. Re: Branislav Jovanovic,User:BraneJ in critical condition
> > >  (Samir Elsharbaty)
> > >   4. Museum v. WMF and WMDE in Commons copyright lawsuit (Pine W)
> > >   5. Re: Free Bassel (rupert THURNER)
> > >   6. Re: Branislav Jovanovic,User:BraneJ in critical condition
> > >  (rupert THURNER)
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> > > Message: 1
> > > Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 09:02:28 -0800
> > > From: Lila Tretikov 
> > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel
> > > Message-ID:
> > > >
> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> > >
> > > Gerard, this is devastating news. Please send our love to Bassel's
> > family.
> > > I still hope this is not true.
> > >
> > > If there is anything we can do from here please let us know.
> > > Lila
> > >
> > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hoi,
> > >> I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death. I
> > read
> > >> it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him in
> > the
> > >> past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.
> > >>
> > >> Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making
> information
> > >> available about Palmyra.
> > >>
> > >> If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>  GerardM
> > >>
> > >> [1]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
> > >> [2]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.html
> > >> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] FDC recommendations for 2015-2016 Round 1 APG grant requests

[Isarra Yos]

I had a go at simplifying:

> We know spending less time on this is a problem, but we're going to 
try to do better. In order to help with this, we'll also be looking at 
what's happened in previous years in order to see where things fell 
short then, comparing that to what the FDC standards say should be 
happening. See also link.


That's how I read it, anyway. Maybe I'm wrong. I don't actually know 
anything about this stuff.


On 24/11/15 04:30, Brandon Harris wrote:

Could you answer this question in plain language, please, as this answer feels 
like a "kiss off".



On Nov 23, 2015, at 8:27 PM, Lila Tretikov  wrote:

We fully acknowledge the issue with the shortened AP review this year and
are committed to the 30 day review going forward. Since the overall issue
has been noted since as far back as 2012 we are doing a review of our
process in comparison to the FDC standards to build best practices going
forward. You can add you comments here to help guide the conversation:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:LilaTretikov_(WMF)#Annual_Plan

Lila



On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Craig Franklin 
wrote:


I likewise appreciate the strong language on the situation with the WMF;
the general opacity and vagueness of public budget plans (especially
considering the requirements for affiliate organisations in this area) is
something that has been widely noted on this list and elsewhere, and to my
mind not answered in a satisfactory way.  It is good to see a fearless FDC
that is prepared to "tell it as it is", and make sure that this problem is
receiving continued attention.

It is my hope that the Foundation will address the issues raised here in a
constructive and transparent manner, rather than ignoring them or trying to
spin them away.

Cheers,
Craig

On 24 November 2015 at 12:04, Pine W  wrote:


Thank you FDC.

Many of the small and midsized APG requests fared well in this round.

That

is nice to see.

I find it concerning that the larger the organization, the more problems
the FDC  seemed to find with the org's budget and performance management
practices. One would expect the larger organizations to have mature and
robust practices in these areas. Regarding WMF in particular, my concerns
about its budget practices are well documented and I appreciate that the
FDC is also taking note of the persistence of the problems. I hope that

WMF

will get serious about its financial transpatency.

A couple of questions about Wikidata:

I'm confused about the funding for Wikidata. In one place the FDC says

that

"Nonetheless, the FDC is exasperated by the inability of WMDE to to
disaggregate the costs of Wikidata from other projects." and in another
place the FDC says that "We have recommended a reduced amount for WMDE in
this round with the expectation that WMDE will not cut Wikidata or their
other tech development work, but will instead find cost savings elsewhere
in its annual plan." If the FDC wants a disaggregated budget (which is
understandable) then why is the FDC expecting WMDE to dip into its other
funds and/or make cuts elsewhere in order to cover the work in this
proposal that the FDC is declining to fund in this proposal? This
expectation seems to be a bit of a contradiction.

I'm also wondering how WMDE is able to submit a dedicated request for
restricted funding for Wikidata if the Wikidata project is so integrated
into WMDE's other budgets that the FDC finds the integration to be
problematic. Can the FDC or our colleagues at WMDE explain this?

Wikidata is a high profile project with a good reputation, and I hope

that

the issues can be resolved soon.

Thanks,

Pine
On Nov 23, 2015 14:09, "matanya moses"  wrote:


Hello Wikimedians,

tl;dr: The FDC’s recommendations for this round of the APG grant

requests

have now been published at:


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:APG/FDC_portal/FDC_recommendations/2015-2016_round1

The Funds Dissemination Committee (FDC) meets twice a year to help make
decisions about how to effectively allocate movement funds to achieve

the

Wikimedia movement's mission, vision, and strategy. [1] We met for four
days last week in San Francisco to review 11 proposals submitted for

this

round of funding. [2]

The committee has now posted our Round 1 2015-2016 recommendations on

the

annual plan grants (APG) to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees.

[3]

The WMF Board representatives to the FDC (Denny Vrandecic, Jan-Bart de
Vreede and Dariusz Jemielniak) will lead the Board in its review of

these

recommendations. The WMF Board will review the recommendations and then
make their decision on them before 1 January 2016.

This round, the eleven proposals came from ten chapters and one

thematic

organisation, totaling requests of approximately $3.8 million USD. Ten
affiliates were returning to the APG program, and one was a new

applicant.

This round, one 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel

[Samir Elsharbaty]

Some suggestions of things we can do:

1. The list of signatories on the amnesty international website does not
include the WMF, the Wikimedia community, any of our affiliations or any
representation from the Wikimedia movement. I wonder if we can contact them
and request adding any of the above mentioned?

2. Use our SM channels to retweet the WMF blog post [1] about him with the
news that he is sentenced to death.

3. We all try to share supporting tweets on the #FreeBassel hashtag.

[1] http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/10/08/bassel-missing-syria/

Thanks,

Samir

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Lila Tretikov  wrote:

> Gerard, this is devastating news. Please send our love to Bassel's family.
> I still hope this is not true.
>
> If there is anything we can do from here please let us know.
> Lila
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death. I
> read
> > it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him in
> the
> > past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.
> >
> > Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making information
> > available about Palmyra.
> >
> > If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
> > Thanks,
> >   GerardM
> >
> > [1]
> >
> >
> http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
> > [2]
> >
> >
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.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,
> 
>
___
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] Branislav Jovanovic, User:BraneJ in critical condition

[Samir Elsharbaty]

Brane,

I didn't have the pleasure of meeting you but I heard a lot of nice
stories, so, please get well soon because I would like to have this
pleasure!

--
Samir Elsharbaty,
Wikipedia Education Program
Wikimedia Foundation
+20.100.944.3478
education.wikimedia.org

On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 11:58 AM, Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Brane,
> Good wishes and get well soon.
> Regards.
>
> On 22 November 2015 at 06:18, Asaf Bartov  wrote:
>
> > I have had the pleasure of meeting and talking to Brane at some length,
> in
> > Belgrade, in Hong Kong, and perhaps elsewhere too.  He is thoughtful and
> > dedicated, and as Milos said, has played a huge part in building up
> Serbian
> > Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia.
> >
> > Brane, I wish you a full recovery, and hope to have the chance to see you
> > again, somewhere in the world or around the wikis.
> >
> > Regards from the Wikisource gathering in Vienna,
> >
> > Asaf
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 4:23 PM, Milos Rancic  wrote:
> >
> > > Pine asked me a good question: Where to express support? I think
> > > whatever you think is the most appropriate. This thread works, as
> > > well. His email is bra...@gmail.com. You have the link to his Facebook
> > > page via WMRS photo. He is using Twitter, as well @branej.
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:40 AM, Milos Rancic 
> > wrote:
> > > > At some point of time, the best you could do is to reach for a
> > > > superstition and hope it will work. It doesn't matter how it will be
> > > > explained after, but at this point of time, it's only that
> > > > superstition which matters.
> > > >
> > > > My particular superstition is that Brane would be able to see his
> > > > eulogy and that we'll be able to laugh together. You know, it's a
> rare
> > > > opportunity to see how your eulogy would look like, so I hope I am
> > > > giving it to him.
> > > >
> > > > An hour ago I heard that he is in critical condition. At first, I was
> > > > thinking what should I write after he dies. Then, I realized that I
> > > > should write it now and post it after. Then, it's come into my mind
> > > > that I should send it immediately as, at least, I could think about
> > > > reading with him this eulogy and your comments after he recovers.
> > > >
> > > > Since August 2014 he is struggling with bone cancer. His curse is
> that
> > > > his body is so strong, that chemotherapy is not working yet.
> > > > Paradoxically, we hope that his body is weak enough now that it will
> > > > finally accept chemotherapy. Monday would be crucial day for him.
> > > >
> > > > He is one of those "invisible" Wikimedians who actually contributed
> > > > significantly to our movement. Some of you, mostly those who visited
> > > > Belgrade, know him.
> > > >
> > > > He is one of the founders of Wikimedia Serbia. It's a pity that he is
> > > > in this condition while WMRS is preparing to celebrate its 10th
> > > > anniversary. Here is our photo from the founding assembly [1].
> > > >
> > > > Presently, he is a board member of Wikimedia Serbia.
> > > >
> > > > His epic fight for copyright correctness on Serbian Wikipedia created
> > > > the foundations of the present day strict copyright rules. It's a
> > > > great achievement for a project of such size and it was possible just
> > > > because of him.
> > > >
> > > > While he was active editor, he was highly trusted Wikipedian and he
> > > > was administrator, bureaucrat and checkuser on Serbian Wikipedia, as
> > > > well as on a number of of other projects in Serbian language.
> > > >
> > > > Alpha software for transliteration between Cyrillic and Latin scripts
> > > > of Serbian language in MediaWiki was his work. That was the basis for
> > > > the future implementation. It was the first software of that kind
> > > > implemented in one web engine.
> > > >
> > > > He is my close friend. Besides a lot of things which he did, which
> > > > will be mentioned at appropriate time, I want to say that many things
> > > > which I did wouldn't be possible without his contribution.
> > > >
> > > > He is now very exhausted and he won't be able to read this today or
> > > > tomorrow. However, I am sure he will be able to read it on Monday,
> > > > after he recovers a bit. So, your support matters, no matter of my
> > > > superstitious reasons for sending this email.
> > > >
> > > > [1]
> > >
> >
> https://www.facebook.com/wikimedia.rs/photos/a.826279217387658.1073741828.294923960523189/1198903920125184/
> > >
> > > ___
> > > 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,
> > > 
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Asaf Bartov
> > Wikimedia Foundation 

[Wikimedia-l] Museum v. WMF and WMDE in Commons copyright lawsuit

[Pine W]

'Tis the season  for a
lawsuit: https://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/11/23/lawsuit-public-domain-art/

Pine
___
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] Free Bassel

[Satdeep Gill]

This is such a sad news. I have been following news about him and i can't 
believe this. This is a black day in the history of Human Civilization. We can 
indeed do little things like sharing posts about him and writing about him 
because that is all we can do perhaps.

Regards
Satdeep Gill
Punjabi Wikimedians

> On 23-Nov-2015, at 8:36 PM, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
> 
> Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
>wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> 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
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: Free Bassel (Lila Tretikov)
>   2. Re: Free Bassel (Samir Elsharbaty)
>   3. Re: Branislav Jovanovic,User:BraneJ in critical condition
>  (Samir Elsharbaty)
>   4. Museum v. WMF and WMDE in Commons copyright lawsuit (Pine W)
>   5. Re: Free Bassel (rupert THURNER)
>   6. Re: Branislav Jovanovic,User:BraneJ in critical condition
>  (rupert THURNER)
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 09:02:28 -0800
> From: Lila Tretikov 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> 
> Gerard, this is devastating news. Please send our love to Bassel's family.
> I still hope this is not true.
> 
> If there is anything we can do from here please let us know.
> Lila
> 
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Gerard Meijssen 
> wrote:
> 
>> Hoi,
>> I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death. I read
>> it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him in the
>> past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.
>> 
>> Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making information
>> available about Palmyra.
>> 
>> If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
>> Thanks,
>>  GerardM
>> 
>> [1]
>> 
>> http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
>> [2]
>> 
>> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.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,
>> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 19:25:24 +0200
> From: Samir Elsharbaty 
> To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel
> Message-ID:
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> 
> Some suggestions of things we can do:
> 
> 1. The list of signatories on the amnesty international website does not
> include the WMF, the Wikimedia community, any of our affiliations or any
> representation from the Wikimedia movement. I wonder if we can contact them
> and request adding any of the above mentioned?
> 
> 2. Use our SM channels to retweet the WMF blog post [1] about him with the
> news that he is sentenced to death.
> 
> 3. We all try to share supporting tweets on the #FreeBassel hashtag.
> 
> [1] http://blog.wikimedia.org/2015/10/08/bassel-missing-syria/
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Samir
> 
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 7:02 PM, Lila Tretikov  wrote:
>> 
>> Gerard, this is devastating news. Please send our love to Bassel's family.
>> I still hope this is not true.
>> 
>> If there is anything we can do from here please let us know.
>> Lila
>> 
>> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
>> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hoi,
>>> I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death. I
>> read
>>> it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him in
>> the
>>> past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.
>>> 
>>> Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making information
>>> available about Palmyra.
>>> 
>>> If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
>>> Thanks,
>>>  GerardM
>>> 
>>> [1]
>> http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
>>> [2]
>> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.html
>>> 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel

[Jeff Elder]

Hi Samir and all,

We are happy to continue posting about Bassel, with all our hopes that he
emerges OK.

We posted about this latest development when it was first reported a few
weeks ago. This morning we updated our blog post
 and reshared
it  out on Twitter
and Facebook .
I also RT'd Creative Commons, who posted about it, and with whom we've been
in touch on this. And we have posted Noura's video
 on Facebook. (It's media of
the day on Wikimedia Commons.) I'll tweet the video later today and stay in
touch with other orgs on Twitter posting about him.

Keeping Bassel in our thoughts,

Jeff Elder
Digital communications manager
Wikimedia Foundation
704-650-4130
@jeffelder 
@wikipedia 
The Wikimedia blog 

Jeff Elder
Digital communications manager
Wikimedia Foundation
704-650-4130
@jeffelder 
@wikipedia 
The Wikimedia blog 

On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Satdeep Gill 
wrote:

> This is such a sad news. I have been following news about him and i can't
> believe this. This is a black day in the history of Human Civilization. We
> can indeed do little things like sharing posts about him and writing about
> him because that is all we can do perhaps.
>
> Regards
> Satdeep Gill
> Punjabi Wikimedians
>
> > On 23-Nov-2015, at 8:36 PM, wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org
> wrote:
> >
> > Send Wikimedia-l mailing list submissions to
> >wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > 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
> >
> > You can reach the person managing the list at
> >wikimedia-l-ow...@lists.wikimedia.org
> >
> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > than "Re: Contents of Wikimedia-l digest..."
> >
> >
> > Today's Topics:
> >
> >   1. Re: Free Bassel (Lila Tretikov)
> >   2. Re: Free Bassel (Samir Elsharbaty)
> >   3. Re: Branislav Jovanovic,User:BraneJ in critical condition
> >  (Samir Elsharbaty)
> >   4. Museum v. WMF and WMDE in Commons copyright lawsuit (Pine W)
> >   5. Re: Free Bassel (rupert THURNER)
> >   6. Re: Branislav Jovanovic,User:BraneJ in critical condition
> >  (rupert THURNER)
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 1
> > Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 09:02:28 -0800
> > From: Lila Tretikov 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel
> > Message-ID:
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >
> > Gerard, this is devastating news. Please send our love to Bassel's
> family.
> > I still hope this is not true.
> >
> > If there is anything we can do from here please let us know.
> > Lila
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 2:12 AM, Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hoi,
> >> I was so afraid when I read that Bassel has been sentenced to death. I
> read
> >> it on the website of Amnesty International [1]. I blogged about him in
> the
> >> past [2]. I am sad to say that it is him.
> >>
> >> Bassel was active as a Wikimedian, he worked towards making information
> >> available about Palmyra.
> >>
> >> If there is anything that we can do, please let us do this.
> >> Thanks,
> >>  GerardM
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> >>
> http://www.amnesty.nl/nieuwsportaal/pers/syria-fears-life-free-expression-advocate
> >> [2]
> >>
> >>
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2015/10/freebassel-free-culture-advocate-who.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,
> >> 
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Message: 2
> > Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 19:25:24 +0200
> > From: Samir Elsharbaty 
> > To: Wikimedia Mailing List 
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Free Bassel
> > Message-ID:
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> >
> > Some suggestions of things we can do:
> >
> > 1. The list of signatories on the amnesty international website does not
> > include the WMF,