Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[MZMcBride]

Todd Allen wrote:
>If he were in favor, it would've been a simple resignation.

Yes. We're left to presume that James forced a vote here by refusing to
step down voluntarily.

>I'm not sure why it's surprising he would oppose it.

Right, that part isn't surprising. But discounting the unsurprising vote,
it was a nearly unanimous decision (8 to 1). I have a good deal of respect
for many of the current Board of Trustees members and I have no doubt that
all of them understand and appreciate the gravity of removing a colleague.
This wasn't a close vote and to me that says quite a bit.

MZMcBride



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[attolippip]

Hello everybody.

What grieves me most is that this edit was done by only a few people,
however powerful [1]
And to make this edit a lot of work and far more trust was involved... [2]

[1]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Board_of_Trustees&diff=104353&oldid=103933
[2]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=Board_of_Trustees&diff=102702&oldid=101417

Best regards,
antanana
Board member of Wikimedia Ukraine

2015-12-29 3:39 GMT+02:00 James Heilman :

> As Patricio stated the "Board has a responsibility to ... ensure that the
> Board functions with *mutual confidence*"
>
> My fellow trustees need no reason beyond lack of trust in me to justify my
> removal. No reason beyond that is needed per our board by laws.
>
> There was not any COI or legal impropriety on my part. I have done what I
> believe is in the best interest of our movement. I hope Patricio and I can
> work together to provide greater explanation in the coming days.
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Todd Allen]

If he were in favor, it would've been a simple resignation. I'm not sure
why it's surprising he would oppose it.
On Dec 28, 2015 6:39 PM, "Ilario Valdelli"  wrote:

> On 29.12.2015 02:17, MZMcBride wrote:
>
>> ---
>> ; Approved: Patricio Lorente, Alice Wiegand, Frieda Brioschi, Jimmy Wales,
>> Stu West, Jan-Bart de Vreede, Guy Kawasaki, Denny Vrandečić,
>>
>> ; Oppose: Dariusz Jemielniak, James Heilman
>> ---
>>
>> This is a somewhat interesting breakdown. I'm also paying close attention
>> to what James posted on this mailing list. In my mind, he's the person
>> likely able to speak most freely about this removal and probably is more
>> familiar with it than most. For now, he seems to have chosen not to say
>> very much. Others involved in the removal likely can't (or maybe won't)
>> say much more, which of course just leaves everyone else to speculate.
>>
>> MZMcBride
>>
>>
> What is strange is that he votes and he votes in opposition.
>
> Did someone see an inconsistencyon that?
>
> Kind regards
>
> --
> Ilario Valdelli
> Wikimedia CH
> Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
> Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
> Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
> Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
> Tel: +41764821371
> http://www.wikimedia.ch
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Tanweer Morshed]

Removing a board member is definitely a serious issue. The community
wants to know every aspect of the incident, why suddenly James has
been removed.


Regards,
Tanweer Morshed

-- 
Regards,
Tanweer Morshed

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Tanweer Morshed]

Removing a board member is definitely a serious issue. The community
wants to know every aspects of the incident, why suddenly James have
been removed.


Regards
Tanweer

-- 
Regards,
Tanweer Morshed

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Kevin Gorman]

Hi all -

I have to start this email with a pair of disclaimers: I'm both not a
lawyer, and I've never been on the board of an organization headquartered
in Florida. However, I have been on multiple California-based boards - none
that had nearly the revenue of WMF, but some whose assets did run in to the
mid-double millions, with revenues in the lower double digit millions.  I
can't assert that the knowledge and training I received about a board
member's fiduciary duty and obligation to ensure that our board members
functioned with 'mutual confidence' in each other equates to the same
obligation that WMF trustees are bound by.  However, in our context,
'mutual confidence' certainly did not mean that we had mutual confidence
all of our duly appointed board members would agree with us on all issues
we considered important - or even that we have confidence that we would be
able to meet agreements that were, in our opinions, fair compromises
between all of our interests.  It meant something else entirely; that we
retained mutual confidence that our fellow board members would uphold their
own fiduciary duties to the organization - which didn't necessarily mean
agreeing with us, but meant strenuously supporting their own ideas about
what would be best for the organization, even if they disagreed with our
own.

Although I'm sure WMF board members received both extensive, and different
(given the locales) training than we did, but for us at least, it would've
been highly unusual for one of us to try to remove a board member,
especially one at-large, simply for strongly advocating their own viewpoint
- it would've been more typical if there were allegations of financial
malfeasance, CoI issues, etc.  It makes me a bit nervous to see one of only
three trustees directly elected by the community and whose platform seemed
to be pretty heavily supported removed with so few details about the
reasoning behind the decision other than the idea that mutual confidence
had become an issue.

Best,
KG

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:34 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

> Bodhisattwa and Nathan,
>
> If I imagine myself in James' shoes, I would be thinking a lot right now
> about:
> * What are my legal obligations around what I may or may not say
> * What are the difficult-to-predict consequences to WMF, to Wikimedia,
> and/or to oneself of saying various things
> * What obligation I have to speak, when no charge against me has been made
> (at least publicly), and when my term as a trustee is now over
>
> Speaking for myself, if I were James, I would not be rushing into any
> public statement.
>
> The people we need most to hear from right now are the eight people who
> made a mysterious decision. The two people who opposed the decision might
> or might have interesting responses -- I too am curious to hear what they
> will say. But it's the majority and/or chair of the Wikimedia Foundation
> Board we need most to hear from.
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
> bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey Doc,
> >
> > The community wants to know about what happened. I think, you need to
> talk
> > about this.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bodhisattwa
> > On 29 Dec 2015 07:25, "Nathan"  wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:39 PM, James Heilman 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > As Patricio stated the "Board has a responsibility to ... ensure that
> > the
> > > > Board functions with *mutual confidence*"
> > > >
> > > > My fellow trustees need no reason beyond lack of trust in me to
> justify
> > > my
> > > > removal. No reason beyond that is needed per our board by laws.
> > > >
> > > > There was not any COI or legal impropriety on my part. I have done
> > what I
> > > > believe is in the best interest of our movement. I hope Patricio and
> I
> > > can
> > > > work together to provide greater explanation in the coming days.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > James Heilman
> > >
> > >
> > > Why be cute about it, then? Just say what happened and leave the games
> to
> > > others.
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: 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
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Wishlist Survey: Top 10 wishes!

[Pete Forsyth]

Henning, I think you have missed an important detail (and if I'm mistaken,
I'd like to know about it).

This is not an "either/or" situation. At least in the past, when I have
manually added Wayback Machine links (or seen them added by bots), they do
not *replace* dead links, they merely complement them. The English
Wikipedia templates include two separate parameters for "url" and
"archiveurl".

Adding one by an automated process does nothing to prevent the other from
being repaired, whether by automated process or by human intervention.

Also, it's essential to consider that many "dead links" are truly dead at
the source site. A newspaper may have implemented a paywall or taken its
archives offline altogether; a political campaign may have let its domain
lapse now that its candidate has retired from politics; a corrupt
government may have removed information to suppress evidence. We all agree
that repairing those dead links that can be repaired is ideal; but not all
dead links *can* be repaired.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Henning Schlottmann 
wrote:

> On 16.12.2015 21:12, Danny Horn wrote:
>
> > #1. Migrate dead links to the Wayback Machine  (111 support votes)
>
> I really hope, you don't follow that wish, as it is detrimental to the
> quality of Wikipedia.
>
> Switching dead links to the archive is a move to a dead end, instead of
> looking for
>
> a) the new correct URL, as many links were just moved.
> b) alternative sources for the same fact.
>
> Ciao Henning
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Pete Forsyth]

Bodhisattwa and Nathan,

If I imagine myself in James' shoes, I would be thinking a lot right now
about:
* What are my legal obligations around what I may or may not say
* What are the difficult-to-predict consequences to WMF, to Wikimedia,
and/or to oneself of saying various things
* What obligation I have to speak, when no charge against me has been made
(at least publicly), and when my term as a trustee is now over

Speaking for myself, if I were James, I would not be rushing into any
public statement.

The people we need most to hear from right now are the eight people who
made a mysterious decision. The two people who opposed the decision might
or might have interesting responses -- I too am curious to hear what they
will say. But it's the majority and/or chair of the Wikimedia Foundation
Board we need most to hear from.

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Bodhisattwa Mandal <
bodhisattwa.rg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey Doc,
>
> The community wants to know about what happened. I think, you need to talk
> about this.
>
> Regards,
> Bodhisattwa
> On 29 Dec 2015 07:25, "Nathan"  wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:39 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
> >
> > > As Patricio stated the "Board has a responsibility to ... ensure that
> the
> > > Board functions with *mutual confidence*"
> > >
> > > My fellow trustees need no reason beyond lack of trust in me to justify
> > my
> > > removal. No reason beyond that is needed per our board by laws.
> > >
> > > There was not any COI or legal impropriety on my part. I have done
> what I
> > > believe is in the best interest of our movement. I hope Patricio and I
> > can
> > > work together to provide greater explanation in the coming days.
> > >
> > > --
> > > James Heilman
> >
> >
> > Why be cute about it, then? Just say what happened and leave the games to
> > others.
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Vinicius Siqueira]

This is an unprecedented and very serious situation. We wait for good
reasons from the Board to decide for this extreme measure.

Vini

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 12:27 AM, Pete Forsyth 
wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Nathan  wrote:
>
> > It was published. It contains no information beyond the OP.
> >
> >
> Well, it contains a bit more -- it clarifies that his removal also ends his
> terms on various committees, and -- rather significant, I think -- it
> states the names of which Trustees voted which way.
> https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:James_Heilman_Removal
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Pete Forsyth]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:21 PM, Nathan  wrote:

> It was published. It contains no information beyond the OP.
>
>
Well, it contains a bit more -- it clarifies that his removal also ends his
terms on various committees, and -- rather significant, I think -- it
states the names of which Trustees voted which way.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:James_Heilman_Removal

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Wishlist Survey: Top 10 wishes!

[Danny Horn]

Henning,

If we're going to solve the problem of dead links, it needs to involve
automation, at least for the heavy lifting. Obviously, if a human
contributor can add a better source, that's great. But there are more dead
links than people willing to replace them.

On English Wikipedia, there's Category:All articles with dead external
links, and it contains more than 134,000 articles[1] -- and those are just
the pages where somebody's added the Dead link template. There are a lot of
missing references -- not just on English WP, but on all the projects --
and connecting those links to a live archive makes them useful again.

For links that were moved, we may be able to collect and use that
information -- I know that we're looking into what kind of metadata we can
collect when a new link is added to the page. But I think finding
alternative sources has to come from human contributors, and that's hard to
scale.

Danny
PM, Community Tech

[1]:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:All_articles_with_dead_external_links



On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Henning Schlottmann 
wrote:

> On 16.12.2015 21:12, Danny Horn wrote:
>
> > #1. Migrate dead links to the Wayback Machine  (111 support votes)
>
> I really hope, you don't follow that wish, as it is detrimental to the
> quality of Wikipedia.
>
> Switching dead links to the archive is a move to a dead end, instead of
> looking for
>
> a) the new correct URL, as many links were just moved.
> b) alternative sources for the same fact.
>
> Ciao Henning
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[John Mark Vandenberg]

Nod. Found it. :/

https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:James_Heilman_Removal
On 29 Dec 2015 1:21 pm, "Nathan"  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:17 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
> wrote:
>
> > Surely there must be a board resolution that needs to be pubished
> regarding
> > this?
>
>
> It was published. It contains no information beyond the OP.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Nathan]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 9:17 PM, John Mark Vandenberg 
wrote:

> Surely there must be a board resolution that needs to be pubished regarding
> this?


It was published. It contains no information beyond the OP.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[John Mark Vandenberg]

Surely there must be a board resolution that needs to be pubished regarding
this?
On 29 Dec 2015 9:44 am, "James Heilman"  wrote:

> On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.
> Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
> election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed in
> me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.
>
> Sincerely
> James Heilman
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Bodhisattwa Mandal]

Hey Doc,

The community wants to know about what happened. I think, you need to talk
about this.

Regards,
Bodhisattwa
On 29 Dec 2015 07:25, "Nathan"  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:39 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > As Patricio stated the "Board has a responsibility to ... ensure that the
> > Board functions with *mutual confidence*"
> >
> > My fellow trustees need no reason beyond lack of trust in me to justify
> my
> > removal. No reason beyond that is needed per our board by laws.
> >
> > There was not any COI or legal impropriety on my part. I have done what I
> > believe is in the best interest of our movement. I hope Patricio and I
> can
> > work together to provide greater explanation in the coming days.
> >
> > --
> > James Heilman
>
>
> Why be cute about it, then? Just say what happened and leave the games to
> others.
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Nathan]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:39 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> As Patricio stated the "Board has a responsibility to ... ensure that the
> Board functions with *mutual confidence*"
>
> My fellow trustees need no reason beyond lack of trust in me to justify my
> removal. No reason beyond that is needed per our board by laws.
>
> There was not any COI or legal impropriety on my part. I have done what I
> believe is in the best interest of our movement. I hope Patricio and I can
> work together to provide greater explanation in the coming days.
>
> --
> James Heilman


Why be cute about it, then? Just say what happened and leave the games to
others.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Pete Forsyth]

James,

Thank you for framing the issue. In the absence of any alternative claim,
let me respond to the "trust" issue.

"Trust" is not a thing in itself. One person trusts another with a certain
responsibility, or to accomplish a certain task. An unqualified "I trust
you" is generally the kind of thing uttered only in marriage ceremonies.

So, there are several kinds of trust I am now thinking about, and I hope to
hear from other Board members:
* Do they mistrust your integrity? (If so, they should say so, even if the
law or their duties prevent them from saying more.)
* Do they mistrust your commitment to our shared mission and vision, and
what's left of our strategy? (Same -- they should say as much)
* Do they mistrust your willingness to rubber-stamp votes that other
Trustees support? (If that is the reason, that would be a horrible
miscarriage of their responsibility, and my own trust in the Board's
ability to carry out its duties would be seriously shaken)

I also look forward to hearing much more substance from the Board. While I
agree that too much haste would be a bad thing, that principle only goes so
far. I will be measuring the time in hours, not days.
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 5:39 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> As Patricio stated the "Board has a responsibility to ... ensure that the
> Board functions with *mutual confidence*"
>
> My fellow trustees need no reason beyond lack of trust in me to justify my
> removal. No reason beyond that is needed per our board by laws.
>
> There was not any COI or legal impropriety on my part. I have done what I
> believe is in the best interest of our movement. I hope Patricio and I can
> work together to provide greater explanation in the coming days.
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Wishlist Survey: Top 10 wishes!

[Trillium Corsage]

28.12.2015, 21:00, "James Heilman" :
> Deadlinks are one of the most common ways of spamming Wikipedia. Paid
> editors replace deadlinks with links to the spam site which now contains
> the contain as it way copied from waybackmachine. Linking to waybackmachine
> is thus superior.
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

Not necessarily disbelieving you, but can you point to a single, concrete 
example of a "paid editor replacing a deadlink with a link to the spam site 
copied from waybackmachine?" I'd like to see what you are talking about.

Trillium Corsage 

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

[Wikimedia-l] Community Wishlist Survey: Top 10 wishes!

[James Heilman]

Hey Trillium

Am a little distracted. Will dug up some difs for you soon. Please email me
directly to remind me.

-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[James Heilman]

As Patricio stated the "Board has a responsibility to ... ensure that the
Board functions with *mutual confidence*"

My fellow trustees need no reason beyond lack of trust in me to justify my
removal. No reason beyond that is needed per our board by laws.

There was not any COI or legal impropriety on my part. I have done what I
believe is in the best interest of our movement. I hope Patricio and I can
work together to provide greater explanation in the coming days.

-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Ilario Valdelli]

On 29.12.2015 02:17, MZMcBride wrote:

---
; Approved: Patricio Lorente, Alice Wiegand, Frieda Brioschi, Jimmy Wales,
Stu West, Jan-Bart de Vreede, Guy Kawasaki, Denny Vrandečić,

; Oppose: Dariusz Jemielniak, James Heilman
---

This is a somewhat interesting breakdown. I'm also paying close attention
to what James posted on this mailing list. In my mind, he's the person
likely able to speak most freely about this removal and probably is more
familiar with it than most. For now, he seems to have chosen not to say
very much. Others involved in the removal likely can't (or maybe won't)
say much more, which of course just leaves everyone else to speculate.

MZMcBride



What is strange is that he votes and he votes in opposition.

Did someone see an inconsistencyon that?

Kind regards

--
Ilario Valdelli
Wikimedia CH
Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens
Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre
Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera
Switzerland - 8008 Zürich
Tel: +41764821371
http://www.wikimedia.ch


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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[MZMcBride]

SarahSV wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Pete Forsyth 
>wrote:
>> With this action, eight Trustees with little accountability overruled
>> several hundred volunteers and another Trustee who literally earned the
>> most support votes of any Trustee in the organization's history.
>>
>> Any explanation of the reasons should be commensurate, in my view, to
>>the points outlined above.
>​
>James was elected by 1,857 people ​​and removed by eight.​ I hope an
>explanation is forthcoming very soon.

---
; Approved: Patricio Lorente, Alice Wiegand, Frieda Brioschi, Jimmy Wales,
Stu West, Jan-Bart de Vreede, Guy Kawasaki, Denny Vrandečić,

; Oppose: Dariusz Jemielniak, James Heilman
---

This is a somewhat interesting breakdown. I'm also paying close attention
to what James posted on this mailing list. In my mind, he's the person
likely able to speak most freely about this removal and probably is more
familiar with it than most. For now, he seems to have chosen not to say
very much. Others involved in the removal likely can't (or maybe won't)
say much more, which of course just leaves everyone else to speculate.

MZMcBride



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Todd Allen]

Even if there are legal reasons that disclosure is not possible, a simple
statement to that effect ("For legal reasons, we cannot provide additional
information") should be at the very least forthcoming.

If the removal was "not for cause", which apparently is allowed, that
should be explicitly stated as well.
On Dec 28, 2015 5:45 PM, "Steven Zhang"  wrote:

> Quite surprised by this action, it does indeed seem unprecedented and I
> would hope the board would release a statement as to why this decision was
> made. Unless there are legal reasons that mean the board cannot disclose
> why, I would think that an explanation should be provided.
>
> Steve Crossin
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On 29 Dec 2015, at 11:32 AM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:
> >
> > I really, really hope that, as fast as one can be written, a resolution
> > explaining more fully the circumstances of James' departure from the
> board
> > is written and passed.  If there are legal reasons that mean that his
> > departure cannot be more fully explained, that itself needs to be noted -
> > and I hope they're particularly strong reasons.  Without looking up the
> > vote count in the last election: James has the trust of a huge segment of
> > the community, and also has a much stronger sense of direction in how WMF
> > should be steered than many of our trustees have in the past.  His sudden
> > removal (the power mechanism I've cobbled together to have my laptop
> > functional today is hilarious) without further explanation looks way too
> > much like one of only three directly elected trustees spoke up too openly
> > in a way that wasn't welcomed about the directions he thought Wikimedia
> > should go - even though he literally published a platform before he was
> > elected.  The sudden removal of a very well respected community elected
> > trustee has at least the appearance of a board that may not want to be
> > responsive to those who literally create it's only valuable asset.
> >
> > Best,
> > KG
> >
> >> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Tito Dutta 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Add me as well.
> >> Eager to know what happened.
> >> ___
> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> >> New messages to: 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
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Comet styles]

Wikimedia is still a democracy, even if the people running it aren't
..as someone pointed out above, he was selected by over 1800
"contributors" and i have personally seen him make 'minor' mistakes,
none justifying why he was removed.. This is quite unbecoming of an
organisation that prides itself on its community, only to remove one
of its community-elected board members without any justification
whatsoever..still waitingI doubt any of us will be fond of
having another elections until we find out why James was removed in
the first place..

-- 
Cometstyles

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Matthew Flaschen]

Yes, it's still a Florida organization.

You can see the resolution cites
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Bylaws#Section_7._Removal , which in
turn cites Section 617.0808(1), which is what I linked to (
https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808)

Matt Flaschen

On Monday, December 28, 2015, Thomas Goldammer  wrote:

> Pine, the resolution was published, and it does not provide any
> information.
> https://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:James_Heilman_Removal
>
> Matt, why would FL law apply to Board decisions? WMF is based in Cali. Are
> they still officially a Florida entity?
>
> Best,
> Th.
>
> 2015-12-29 1:39 GMT+01:00 Pine W >:
>
> > I am hopeful that the resolution, when it is published, will provide us
> > with more information.
> >
> > IMO, speed is less important here than the completeness of the
> information.
> > I'd prefer a more thorough explanation provided tomorrow than a hasty and
> > potentially incomplete explanation today.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Pine
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Kevin Gorman  > wrote:
> >
> > > I really, really hope that, as fast as one can be written, a resolution
> > > explaining more fully the circumstances of James' departure from the
> > board
> > > is written and passed.  If there are legal reasons that mean that his
> > > departure cannot be more fully explained, that itself needs to be
> noted -
> > > and I hope they're particularly strong reasons.  Without looking up the
> > > vote count in the last election: James has the trust of a huge segment
> of
> > > the community, and also has a much stronger sense of direction in how
> WMF
> > > should be steered than many of our trustees have in the past.  His
> sudden
> > > removal (the power mechanism I've cobbled together to have my laptop
> > > functional today is hilarious) without further explanation looks way
> too
> > > much like one of only three directly elected trustees spoke up too
> openly
> > > in a way that wasn't welcomed about the directions he thought Wikimedia
> > > should go - even though he literally published a platform before he was
> > > elected.  The sudden removal of a very well respected community elected
> > > trustee has at least the appearance of a board that may not want to be
> > > responsive to those who literally create it's only valuable asset.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > KG
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Tito Dutta  > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Add me as well.​
> > > > ​Eager to know what happened.​
> > > > ___
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > > > Unsubscribe:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > >  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > >  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >  ?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>  ?subject=unsubscribe>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[SarahSV]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

>
> With this action, eight Trustees with little accountability overruled
> several hundred volunteers and another Trustee who literally earned the
> most support votes of any Trustee in the organization's history.
>
> Any explanation of the reasons should be commensurate, in my view, to the
> points outlined above.
>
> -Pete
> [[User:Peteforsyth]]
>
​
James was elected

by 1,857 people ​

​and removed by eight.​ I hope an explanation is forthcoming very soon.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Steven Zhang]

Quite surprised by this action, it does indeed seem unprecedented and I would 
hope the board would release a statement as to why this decision was made. 
Unless there are legal reasons that mean the board cannot disclose why, I would 
think that an explanation should be provided.

Steve Crossin

Sent from my iPhone

> On 29 Dec 2015, at 11:32 AM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:
> 
> I really, really hope that, as fast as one can be written, a resolution
> explaining more fully the circumstances of James' departure from the board
> is written and passed.  If there are legal reasons that mean that his
> departure cannot be more fully explained, that itself needs to be noted -
> and I hope they're particularly strong reasons.  Without looking up the
> vote count in the last election: James has the trust of a huge segment of
> the community, and also has a much stronger sense of direction in how WMF
> should be steered than many of our trustees have in the past.  His sudden
> removal (the power mechanism I've cobbled together to have my laptop
> functional today is hilarious) without further explanation looks way too
> much like one of only three directly elected trustees spoke up too openly
> in a way that wasn't welcomed about the directions he thought Wikimedia
> should go - even though he literally published a platform before he was
> elected.  The sudden removal of a very well respected community elected
> trustee has at least the appearance of a board that may not want to be
> responsive to those who literally create it's only valuable asset.
> 
> Best,
> KG
> 
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>> 
>> Add me as well.
>> Eager to know what happened.
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Pete Forsyth]

I'd like to suggest we look at this decision from as objective and broad a
perspective as possible, and consider any statement (or lack of any
statement) from the Wikimedia Foundation from that perspective. My initial
thoughts are that the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees are an entity
that:
* Controls one of the most valuable brands in the world
* Leverages that control to command a budget approaching $100 million
annually, mostly from $15 donations
* Makes or approves decisions, with an unknown level of transparency, about
how to spend that budget
* Is only minimally accountable to anyone. (Four Trustees are selected by
the Board itself, one is a co-founder of Wikipedia with exclusive claim to
a seat, two are selected by a somewhat arcane process by the Chapters, and
only three -- 30% -- are elected by Wikimedia volunteers)

With this action, eight Trustees with little accountability overruled
several hundred volunteers and another Trustee who literally earned the
most support votes of any Trustee in the organization's history.

Any explanation of the reasons should be commensurate, in my view, to the
points outlined above.

-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:

> I really, really hope that, as fast as one can be written, a resolution
> explaining more fully the circumstances of James' departure from the board
> is written and passed.  If there are legal reasons that mean that his
> departure cannot be more fully explained, that itself needs to be noted -
> and I hope they're particularly strong reasons.  Without looking up the
> vote count in the last election: James has the trust of a huge segment of
> the community, and also has a much stronger sense of direction in how WMF
> should be steered than many of our trustees have in the past.  His sudden
> removal (the power mechanism I've cobbled together to have my laptop
> functional today is hilarious) without further explanation looks way too
> much like one of only three directly elected trustees spoke up too openly
> in a way that wasn't welcomed about the directions he thought Wikimedia
> should go - even though he literally published a platform before he was
> elected.  The sudden removal of a very well respected community elected
> trustee has at least the appearance of a board that may not want to be
> responsive to those who literally create it's only valuable asset.
>
> Best,
> KG
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Add me as well.​
> > ​Eager to know what happened.​
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Thomas Goldammer]

Pine, the resolution was published, and it does not provide any
information.
https://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:James_Heilman_Removal

Matt, why would FL law apply to Board decisions? WMF is based in Cali. Are
they still officially a Florida entity?

Best,
Th.

2015-12-29 1:39 GMT+01:00 Pine W :

> I am hopeful that the resolution, when it is published, will provide us
> with more information.
>
> IMO, speed is less important here than the completeness of the information.
> I'd prefer a more thorough explanation provided tomorrow than a hasty and
> potentially incomplete explanation today.
>
> Thanks,
> Pine
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:
>
> > I really, really hope that, as fast as one can be written, a resolution
> > explaining more fully the circumstances of James' departure from the
> board
> > is written and passed.  If there are legal reasons that mean that his
> > departure cannot be more fully explained, that itself needs to be noted -
> > and I hope they're particularly strong reasons.  Without looking up the
> > vote count in the last election: James has the trust of a huge segment of
> > the community, and also has a much stronger sense of direction in how WMF
> > should be steered than many of our trustees have in the past.  His sudden
> > removal (the power mechanism I've cobbled together to have my laptop
> > functional today is hilarious) without further explanation looks way too
> > much like one of only three directly elected trustees spoke up too openly
> > in a way that wasn't welcomed about the directions he thought Wikimedia
> > should go - even though he literally published a platform before he was
> > elected.  The sudden removal of a very well respected community elected
> > trustee has at least the appearance of a board that may not want to be
> > responsive to those who literally create it's only valuable asset.
> >
> > Best,
> > KG
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Tito Dutta  wrote:
> >
> > > Add me as well.​
> > > ​Eager to know what happened.​
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: 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
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Pine W]

I am hopeful that the resolution, when it is published, will provide us
with more information.

IMO, speed is less important here than the completeness of the information.
I'd prefer a more thorough explanation provided tomorrow than a hasty and
potentially incomplete explanation today.

Thanks,
Pine



On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:

> I really, really hope that, as fast as one can be written, a resolution
> explaining more fully the circumstances of James' departure from the board
> is written and passed.  If there are legal reasons that mean that his
> departure cannot be more fully explained, that itself needs to be noted -
> and I hope they're particularly strong reasons.  Without looking up the
> vote count in the last election: James has the trust of a huge segment of
> the community, and also has a much stronger sense of direction in how WMF
> should be steered than many of our trustees have in the past.  His sudden
> removal (the power mechanism I've cobbled together to have my laptop
> functional today is hilarious) without further explanation looks way too
> much like one of only three directly elected trustees spoke up too openly
> in a way that wasn't welcomed about the directions he thought Wikimedia
> should go - even though he literally published a platform before he was
> elected.  The sudden removal of a very well respected community elected
> trustee has at least the appearance of a board that may not want to be
> responsive to those who literally create it's only valuable asset.
>
> Best,
> KG
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Tito Dutta  wrote:
>
> > Add me as well.​
> > ​Eager to know what happened.​
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Kevin Gorman]

I really, really hope that, as fast as one can be written, a resolution
explaining more fully the circumstances of James' departure from the board
is written and passed.  If there are legal reasons that mean that his
departure cannot be more fully explained, that itself needs to be noted -
and I hope they're particularly strong reasons.  Without looking up the
vote count in the last election: James has the trust of a huge segment of
the community, and also has a much stronger sense of direction in how WMF
should be steered than many of our trustees have in the past.  His sudden
removal (the power mechanism I've cobbled together to have my laptop
functional today is hilarious) without further explanation looks way too
much like one of only three directly elected trustees spoke up too openly
in a way that wasn't welcomed about the directions he thought Wikimedia
should go - even though he literally published a platform before he was
elected.  The sudden removal of a very well respected community elected
trustee has at least the appearance of a board that may not want to be
responsive to those who literally create it's only valuable asset.

Best,
KG

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:10 PM, Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Add me as well.​
> ​Eager to know what happened.​
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Matthew Flaschen]

Under Florida law
(https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808), there is a
distinction between removals for cause and removals not for cause
(https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2011/617.0808).

Removals not for cause require a 2/3 majority (this standard was still met).

If you are unwilling or unable to specify the reason for removal, I
think you should at least specify whether it was for cause.

Thanks,

Matt Flaschen

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:29 PM, Patricio Lorente
 wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted to remove one of the
> Trustees, Dr. James Heilman, from the Board. His term ended effective
> immediately.
>
> This was not a decision the Board took lightly. The Board has a
> responsibility to the Wikimedia movement and the Wikimedia Foundation to
> ensure that the Board functions with mutual confidence to ensure effective
> governance. Following serious consideration, the Board felt this removal
> decision was a necessary step at this time. The resolution will be
> published shortly.
>
> This decision creates an open seat for a community-selected Trustee. The
> Board is committed to filling this open community seat as quickly as
> possible. We will reach out to the 2015 election committee
> 
> to discuss our options, and will keep you informed as we determine next
> steps.
>
> Patricio Lorente
>
> Chair, Board of Trustees
>
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> --
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Bodhisattwa Mandal]

Hi,

This official statement is very much weak and does not state any reason of
such removal. A rather serious and transparent explanation to the community
is needed.

Regards,
Bodhisattwa
On 29 Dec 2015 05:22, "Risker"  wrote:

> On 28 December 2015 at 18:29, Patricio Lorente  >
> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted to remove one of
> the
> > Trustees, Dr. James Heilman, from the Board. His term ended effective
> > immediately.
> >
> > This was not a decision the Board took lightly. The Board has a
> > responsibility to the Wikimedia movement and the Wikimedia Foundation to
> > ensure that the Board functions with mutual confidence to ensure
> effective
> > governance. Following serious consideration, the Board felt this removal
> > decision was a necessary step at this time. The resolution will be
> > published shortly.
> >
> > This decision creates an open seat for a community-selected Trustee. The
> > Board is committed to filling this open community seat as quickly as
> > possible. We will reach out to the 2015 election committee
> > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Committee
> > >
> > to discuss our options, and will keep you informed as we determine next
> > steps.
> >
> > Patricio Lorente
> >
> > Chair, Board of Trustees
> >
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> >
>
> While you are at it, Patricio, please also publish the names of the two new
> Board-appointed trustees.
>
> Risker/Anne
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Tito Dutta]

Add me as well.​
​Eager to know what happened.​
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Nathan]

Add my voice to those waiting for the Board to provide something closer to
the minimum necessary context for this decision.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Anthony Cole]

Here is the resolution removing James.

https://m.wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:James_Heilman_Removal

On Tuesday, December 29, 2015, Risker  wrote:

> On 28 December 2015 at 18:29, Patricio Lorente  >
> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted to remove one of
> the
> > Trustees, Dr. James Heilman, from the Board. His term ended effective
> > immediately.
> >
> > This was not a decision the Board took lightly. The Board has a
> > responsibility to the Wikimedia movement and the Wikimedia Foundation to
> > ensure that the Board functions with mutual confidence to ensure
> effective
> > governance. Following serious consideration, the Board felt this removal
> > decision was a necessary step at this time. The resolution will be
> > published shortly.
> >
> > This decision creates an open seat for a community-selected Trustee. The
> > Board is committed to filling this open community seat as quickly as
> > possible. We will reach out to the 2015 election committee
> > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Committee
> > >
> > to discuss our options, and will keep you informed as we determine next
> > steps.
> >
> > Patricio Lorente
> >
> > Chair, Board of Trustees
> >
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> >
>
> While you are at it, Patricio, please also publish the names of the two new
> Board-appointed trustees.
>
> Risker/Anne
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org 
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>  ?subject=unsubscribe>



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Thomas Goldammer]

Dear Patricio,

as James is (or was) a community-elected member, it would have been nice to
include reasons why the Board took this decision in the announcement. It
gives (at least me) the impression of deliberate non-openness, and I don't
like it.

Th.

2015-12-29 0:52 GMT+01:00 Risker :

> On 28 December 2015 at 18:29, Patricio Lorente  >
> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted to remove one of
> the
> > Trustees, Dr. James Heilman, from the Board. His term ended effective
> > immediately.
> >
> > This was not a decision the Board took lightly. The Board has a
> > responsibility to the Wikimedia movement and the Wikimedia Foundation to
> > ensure that the Board functions with mutual confidence to ensure
> effective
> > governance. Following serious consideration, the Board felt this removal
> > decision was a necessary step at this time. The resolution will be
> > published shortly.
> >
> > This decision creates an open seat for a community-selected Trustee. The
> > Board is committed to filling this open community seat as quickly as
> > possible. We will reach out to the 2015 election committee
> > <
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Committee
> > >
> > to discuss our options, and will keep you informed as we determine next
> > steps.
> >
> > Patricio Lorente
> >
> > Chair, Board of Trustees
> >
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> >
>
> While you are at it, Patricio, please also publish the names of the two new
> Board-appointed trustees.
>
> Risker/Anne
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Risker]

On 28 December 2015 at 18:29, Patricio Lorente 
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted to remove one of the
> Trustees, Dr. James Heilman, from the Board. His term ended effective
> immediately.
>
> This was not a decision the Board took lightly. The Board has a
> responsibility to the Wikimedia movement and the Wikimedia Foundation to
> ensure that the Board functions with mutual confidence to ensure effective
> governance. Following serious consideration, the Board felt this removal
> decision was a necessary step at this time. The resolution will be
> published shortly.
>
> This decision creates an open seat for a community-selected Trustee. The
> Board is committed to filling this open community seat as quickly as
> possible. We will reach out to the 2015 election committee
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Committee
> >
> to discuss our options, and will keep you informed as we determine next
> steps.
>
> Patricio Lorente
>
> Chair, Board of Trustees
>
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
>

While you are at it, Patricio, please also publish the names of the two new
Board-appointed trustees.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Lane Rasberry]

I hope that the WMF board and James are able to collaborate a bit further
to give an explanation of the cause of this, and that the explanation given
is to the mutual satisfaction of both the board and James.

I presume that the current notice of dismissal without explanation is not
the explanation that pleases all those involved in this.

yours,

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 5:43 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.
> Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
> election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed in
> me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.
>
> Sincerely
> James Heilman
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Lane Rasberry
user:bluerasberry on Wikipedia
206.801.0814
l...@bluerasberry.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Fæ]

Anyone who has worked with James on the projects will know how seriously
committed he is to open knowledge and that he is held in the highest regard
by the community for his achievements and character. Losing him from the
WMF board is a severe blow for fellow volunteers. With James voted in as a
trustee to rely on to ask the hard questions on governance, I thought that
the endless cycle of "moving forward" rhetoric on delivering improvement
and transparency now had some true substance behind it.

James, whatever went on behind this, always trust in your own judgement,
focus on what really matters, and KBO.[1] The WMF has managed to publicly
shoot the cat.

1. It was good enough for Churchill and a pinch of stoicism might be needed
at this time.

Fae
On 28 Dec 2015 23:17, "SarahSV"  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 3:43 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia
> Foundation.
> > Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
> > election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed
> in
> > me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.
> >
> > Sincerely
> > James Heilman
> >
>
> ​James, this is disappointing. Can you say more about what happened?
>
> Sarah​
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Kevin Gorman]

I really really hope that the full and transparent text of the resolution
is published as soon as is reasonably possible.  James has the trust of a
colossal number of movement members, and seeing him suddenly removed short
of allegations of financial malfeasance or something to that effect is
incredibly jarring.  This has never happened before in the history of the
WMF... and bluntly, we've definitely had community elected trustees whose
judgement was less well thought of than James.


KG

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Patricio Lorente <
patricio.lore...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted to remove one of the
> Trustees, Dr. James Heilman, from the Board. His term ended effective
> immediately.
>
> This was not a decision the Board took lightly. The Board has a
> responsibility to the Wikimedia movement and the Wikimedia Foundation to
> ensure that the Board functions with mutual confidence to ensure effective
> governance. Following serious consideration, the Board felt this removal
> decision was a necessary step at this time. The resolution will be
> published shortly.
>
> This decision creates an open seat for a community-selected Trustee. The
> Board is committed to filling this open community seat as quickly as
> possible. We will reach out to the 2015 election committee
> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Committee
> >
> to discuss our options, and will keep you informed as we determine next
> steps.
>
> Patricio Lorente
>
> Chair, Board of Trustees
>
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> --
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Announcement about changes to the Board

[Patricio Lorente]

Dear all,

Today the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees voted to remove one of the
Trustees, Dr. James Heilman, from the Board. His term ended effective
immediately.

This was not a decision the Board took lightly. The Board has a
responsibility to the Wikimedia movement and the Wikimedia Foundation to
ensure that the Board functions with mutual confidence to ensure effective
governance. Following serious consideration, the Board felt this removal
decision was a necessary step at this time. The resolution will be
published shortly.

This decision creates an open seat for a community-selected Trustee. The
Board is committed to filling this open community seat as quickly as
possible. We will reach out to the 2015 election committee

to discuss our options, and will keep you informed as we determine next
steps.

Patricio Lorente

Chair, Board of Trustees

Wikimedia Foundation

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Todd Allen]

I join everyone else here in hoping we'll be hearing a very good reason for
this. I understand it may not be possible (or wise) for Doc James to
provide that, but it certainly shouldn't be done for simple differences of
opinion.
On Dec 28, 2015 4:17 PM, "SarahSV"  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 3:43 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
>
> > On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia
> Foundation.
> > Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
> > election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed
> in
> > me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.
> >
> > Sincerely
> > James Heilman
> >
>
> ​James, this is disappointing. Can you say more about what happened?
>
> Sarah​
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Milos Rancic]

This is not good. I suppose Board will give us an explanation of what
happened, so we could discuss it here.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:59 PM, Kevin Gorman  wrote:
> Dr James, thank you for your  work in Wikimedia governance (and for that
> matter, management so far.)  I really hope a full, thoughtful, and
> defensible statement in support of his decision will be coming from the
> rest of the board shortly.  I'm a little bit disturbed to see a respected
> community member who was elected with a significant mandate removed from
> the board without there being something like allegations of financial
> malfeasance, etc, involved.  The Wikimedia Foundation board does
> (literally) directly control the projects, and does (literally) directly
> have the ability to appoint and dismiss board members at its will, but I
> would hope that such power would be exercised with extreme discretion,
> especially with regards to a community member generally as well-respected
> and with as solid judgement as Dr. James has.
>
> ---
> Kevin Gorman
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:43 PM, James Heilman  wrote:
>
>> On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.
>> Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
>> election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed in
>> me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.
>>
>> Sincerely
>> James Heilman
>>
>> --
>> James Heilman
>> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>>
>> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
>> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[SarahSV]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 3:43 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.
> Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
> election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed in
> me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.
>
> Sincerely
> James Heilman
>

​James, this is disappointing. Can you say more about what happened?

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Ricordisamoa]

Wut?

Il 28/12/2015 23:43, James Heilman ha scritto:

On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed in
me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.

Sincerely
James Heilman




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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Kevin Gorman]

Dr James, thank you for your  work in Wikimedia governance (and for that
matter, management so far.)  I really hope a full, thoughtful, and
defensible statement in support of his decision will be coming from the
rest of the board shortly.  I'm a little bit disturbed to see a respected
community member who was elected with a significant mandate removed from
the board without there being something like allegations of financial
malfeasance, etc, involved.  The Wikimedia Foundation board does
(literally) directly control the projects, and does (literally) directly
have the ability to appoint and dismiss board members at its will, but I
would hope that such power would be exercised with extreme discretion,
especially with regards to a community member generally as well-respected
and with as solid judgement as Dr. James has.

---
Kevin Gorman

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:43 PM, James Heilman  wrote:

> On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.
> Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
> election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed in
> me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.
>
> Sincerely
> James Heilman
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[Tito Dutta]

>
> On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.

I don't know the reason. . . anyway, good wishes.:)


On 29 December 2015 at 04:13, James Heilman  wrote:

> On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.
> Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
> election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed in
> me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.
>
> Sincerely
> James Heilman
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] WMF Board of Trustees

[James Heilman]

On Dec 28th 2015 I was removed from the board of the Wikimedia Foundation.
Many thanks to all those who gave me their support during the last
election. I have worked in the last six month to honor the trust placed in
me by advocating for our values, communities, and projects.

Sincerely
James Heilman

-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Wishlist Survey: Top 10 wishes!

[Brad Jorsch (Anomie)]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Henning Schlottmann  wrote:

> Switching dead links to the archive is a move to a dead end, instead of
> looking for
>
> a) the new correct URL, as many links were just moved.
> b) alternative sources for the same fact.
>

An automated process can't reliably do either of those, while having the
archive link available will make it easier for human editors to do both of
those since they'll have the actual content of the dead link available
rather than just what information is preserved in the citation (URL, title,
author, maybe a short quotation).
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Community Wishlist Survey: Top 10 wishes!

[James Heilman]

Deadlinks are one of the most common ways of spamming Wikipedia. Paid
editors replace deadlinks with links to the spam site which now contains
the contain as it way copied from waybackmachine. Linking to waybackmachine
is thus superior.

-- 
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian

The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
www.opentextbookofmedicine.com
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AWB & Ubuntu: Can really someone help?

[David Gerard]

I got it to work on Ubuntu 14.04 by approximately this method. It's
INCREDIBLY long winded, you have to download about a gigabyte of stuff
from Microsoft, one file didn't exist at the listed download site any
more and I had to get a questionable copy off someone's "saved stuff"
web directory, and after all that a pile of stuff doesn't work
properly. *However*, it is usable for real work without getting a
Windows box to run it on.

On 28 December 2015 at 11:52, Asaf Bartov  wrote:
> I have recently been able to make it work under WINE, and have updated the
> documentation page accordingly[1].  It did take a series of winetricks(1)
> incantations to get it to work.  It's quite brittle.  In particular, make
> sure you're specifying WINARCH=32.
>
>A.
>
> [1]
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Mono_and_Wine&diff=681340924&oldid=681113160
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:39 AM, Fæ  wrote:
>
>> It's been several years since I used AWB for anything serious, precisely
>> because it only runs under Windows.
>>
>> The conventional advice is to run it in a windows emulator, such as Wine,
>> Parallels or Virtualbox. Folks talk about porting it, but I suspect this
>> will never happen.
>>
>> Fae
>> On 28 Dec 2015 10:36, "Tito Dutta"  wrote:
>>
>> > In last 2 years I have contacted every help section from AWB talk page,
>> > Ubuntu help forum etc.
>> > Trying this medium as well:
>> > Can someone tell me how to use AWB on Ubuntu?
>> > ___
>> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> > New messages to: 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
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Asaf Bartov
> Wikimedia Foundation 
>
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
> sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> https://donate.wikimedia.org
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AWB & Ubuntu: Can really someone help?

[Pete Forsyth]

I have also managed to make it work under Wine on Ubuntu in the past, but I
would stress: this is a HIGHLY frustrating process, it requires many rounds
of updates and incantations that add up to literally hours of work. I would
not encourage anyone to do it unless they are BOTH already familiar with
setting up Wine, AND have a very compelling reason to run it on Linux.

My understanding is that while AWB is freely licensed, it is very heavily
dependent on Microsoft's proprietary DotNet framework. Getting an
up-to-date version of DotNet working under Linux is the real killer.

However, AWB is tremendously useful software. In addition to supporting
many efforts to improve the quality of wiki content, it can be invaluable
in running community-oriented projects. It was a central tool in the 6 week
Writing Wikipedia Articles course I have run 4 times, and will run again in
the spring. The existence of AWB opens a great many opportunities in
addressing the challenges in running projects that could address
Wikipedia's social problems.

Perhaps this is a good area for an ambitious coder to apply for a Wikimedia
grant? Asaf, can you speak to whether that might be a worthwhile proposal,
and what kinds of considerations might make it an attractive project to
fund?
-Pete
[[User:Peteforsyth]]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:54 AM, Tito Dutta  wrote:

> Yes, that's right, Wine, Q4Wine and PlayonLinux don't work.
>
> On 28 December 2015 at 16:09, Fæ  wrote:
>
> > It's been several years since I used AWB for anything serious, precisely
> > because it only runs under Windows.
> >
> > The conventional advice is to run it in a windows emulator, such as Wine,
> > Parallels or Virtualbox. Folks talk about porting it, but I suspect this
> > will never happen.
> >
> > Fae
> > On 28 Dec 2015 10:36, "Tito Dutta"  wrote:
> >
> > > In last 2 years I have contacted every help section from AWB talk page,
> > > Ubuntu help forum etc.
> > > Trying this medium as well:
> > > Can someone tell me how to use AWB on Ubuntu?
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: 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
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AWB & Ubuntu: Can really someone help?

[Tito Dutta]

Yes, that's right, Wine, Q4Wine and PlayonLinux don't work.

On 28 December 2015 at 16:09, Fæ  wrote:

> It's been several years since I used AWB for anything serious, precisely
> because it only runs under Windows.
>
> The conventional advice is to run it in a windows emulator, such as Wine,
> Parallels or Virtualbox. Folks talk about porting it, but I suspect this
> will never happen.
>
> Fae
> On 28 Dec 2015 10:36, "Tito Dutta"  wrote:
>
> > In last 2 years I have contacted every help section from AWB talk page,
> > Ubuntu help forum etc.
> > Trying this medium as well:
> > Can someone tell me how to use AWB on Ubuntu?
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community Wishlist Survey: Top 10 wishes!

[Henning Schlottmann]

On 16.12.2015 21:12, Danny Horn wrote:

> #1. Migrate dead links to the Wayback Machine  (111 support votes)

I really hope, you don't follow that wish, as it is detrimental to the
quality of Wikipedia.

Switching dead links to the archive is a move to a dead end, instead of
looking for

a) the new correct URL, as many links were just moved.
b) alternative sources for the same fact.

Ciao Henning



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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Jane Darnell]

Well the chances of me being firebombed while on vacation in the states are
probably higher than me being firebombed for editing Wikipedia, but that
still doesn't mean we need to worry about changing the wiki model. I guess
I have lost the thread of your point entirely now.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:13 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>
> > All I said is that the wiki way works, that's all. You can't hide it when
> > someone tries to take over a project, and that is the reason we shouldn't
> > try to anticipate that with convoluted strategies. "Assume Good Faith"
> will
> > always win out over any strange misguided takeover strategy, which is why
> > governments that intend to do such things choose nowadays to just block
> > wikimedia altogether. It is not our wake-up call to take, but that of the
> > Kazakh people.
>
>
>
> Ah, I see. That's easy to say for people in the Western world.
>
> In Uzbekistan dissidents have been boiled alive.[1] In Kazakhstan,
> journalists are imprisoned and harassed; one was firebombed and had the
> decapitated carcass of a dog left outside her offices. (The dog's head
> later turned up at her home.)[2] In Azerbaijan, Wikipedians have been
> tortured and threatened with torture, according to posts on the WMCEE-l
> mailing list.[3]
>
> All respect to you if you run these risks in order to edit Wikipedia, and
> still do it regardless. But if you don't, please don't dispense blithe and
> jejune advice, and don't tell people who are concerned about remaining
> alive, preferably with their skin and fingernails intact, that they need a
> wake-up call.
>
> I'd rather you told the WMF not to reward the functionaries of such regimes
> with "Wikipedian of the Year" awards and trademark licence agreements.
>
> [1]
> http://www.rferl.org/content/uzbekistans-house-of-torture/24667200.html
> [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irina_Petrushova
> [3] http://listy.wikimedia.pl/pipermail/wmcee-l/2015-May/000839.html
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 6:00 PM, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> All I said is that the wiki way works, that's all. You can't hide it when
> someone tries to take over a project, and that is the reason we shouldn't
> try to anticipate that with convoluted strategies. "Assume Good Faith" will
> always win out over any strange misguided takeover strategy, which is why
> governments that intend to do such things choose nowadays to just block
> wikimedia altogether. It is not our wake-up call to take, but that of the
> Kazakh people.



Ah, I see. That's easy to say for people in the Western world.

In Uzbekistan dissidents have been boiled alive.[1] In Kazakhstan,
journalists are imprisoned and harassed; one was firebombed and had the
decapitated carcass of a dog left outside her offices. (The dog's head
later turned up at her home.)[2] In Azerbaijan, Wikipedians have been
tortured and threatened with torture, according to posts on the WMCEE-l
mailing list.[3]

All respect to you if you run these risks in order to edit Wikipedia, and
still do it regardless. But if you don't, please don't dispense blithe and
jejune advice, and don't tell people who are concerned about remaining
alive, preferably with their skin and fingernails intact, that they need a
wake-up call.

I'd rather you told the WMF not to reward the functionaries of such regimes
with "Wikipedian of the Year" awards and trademark licence agreements.

[1] http://www.rferl.org/content/uzbekistans-house-of-torture/24667200.html
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irina_Petrushova
[3] http://listy.wikimedia.pl/pipermail/wmcee-l/2015-May/000839.html
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Risker]

"Assume good faith" is actually what got Kazakh Wikipedia into the mess it
is in. Wikimedia projects have been blocked by governments practically
since their inception.  Perverting the content is the new way of doing
things. They've learned from the PR and SEO industries.

And that leads us back to Wikidata.  There has always been the recognized
potential for use of Wikidata to build articles for smaller projects, based
on properly-sourced, independently verified (or verifiable) data; it's one
of the reasons that Wikidata has been accepted into the Wikimedia family.
But the key problem with creating content in this way is that the contents
of Wikidata are currently mostly unsourced or so poorly sourced that they
can't be considered either verified or verifiable even in one's wildest
dreams.  My experience, based on reading about a hundred user talk pages on
Wikidata recently, is that Wikidatians do not consider sourcing to be
important or even desirable.  This is a major problem for any group that
wants to reuse the content, because bluntly put there's a fair amount of
junk that got transferred to Wikidata, and it's currently not possible to
sort the wheat from the chaff.  The absence of references on Wikidata is a
significant barrier to the reusability of its data. I despair every time
someone says "it's like Wikipedia, it will get better!"  Well, no.  Huge
swaths of existing Wikipedias have never improved despite being more than a
decade old.  Our first new Wikimedia project in years shouldn't be basing
its practices on principles that have already been proved insufficient to
maintain and curate major projects with thousands of active editors.

So - Wikidata could play an important role in the development of core
content on smaller-sized projects with a small editorial community.  (I say
"could" because we have seen unsuccessful experiments importing significant
quantities of information into smaller projects.  Swahili Wikipedia has
still not completely recovered from its experience.)  But without being
able to provide provenance, its data doesn't even meet the minimal criteria
for verifiability.

Risker/Anne



On 28 December 2015 at 13:00, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> All I said is that the wiki way works, that's all. You can't hide it when
> someone tries to take over a project, and that is the reason we shouldn't
> try to anticipate that with convoluted strategies. "Assume Good Faith" will
> always win out over any strange misguided takeover strategy, which is why
> governments that intend to do such things choose nowadays to just block
> wikimedia altogether. It is not our wake-up call to take, but that of the
> Kazakh people.
>
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Risker  wrote:
>
> > On 28 December 2015 at 11:22, Jane Darnell  wrote:
> >
> > > Anyone can exploit the content on WMF for their needs. What I mean by
> "it
> > > works" is that you can't fool people when you try to change Wikipedia
> to
> > > fit government policy. We can easily identify problematic edits. Never
> > > underestimate the diaspora of any country. Wikimedia is always bigger
> > than
> > > any one government will ever estimate.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Well, yes, anyone can exploit the content of WMF projects; we don't
> usually
> > give them kudos for doing so, though.  And you most certainly CAN fool
> > people when you change Wikipedia to change government policy, if the
> > government overwhelms a small "traditional" Wikipedia community with
> > bribes, threats to well-being and good old fashioned paid editing.  The
> > Wikipedia brand is perceived to be independent from such influences; that
> > it isn't in this case (and who knows how many other cases) cannot be
> > perceived by readers who do not have any alternative resources.
> >
> > Small communities with less than 50 active editors can be pretty easily
> > swamped; a university class adding valuable, well sourced and researched
> > content may have a positive effect, just as focused addition of heavily
> > biased material by "editing for reward" (rewards including payment,
> gifts,
> > or simply not being incarcerated) can turn a Wikipedia into a platform
> for
> > third parties.This particular project was an easy target, and there
> are
> > many others that could similarly be overwhelmed.  We need to recognize
> that
> > most of the world does not live under the conditions that encourage or
> even
> > permit the development of freely available information. As a global
> > community we need to stop pretending that the example of Kazakh Wikipedia
> > is not a major and significant bellwether that requires very serious
> review
> > of how we encourage and  develop projects centered in countries with
> > repressive regimes.  Many of these regions are areas with significant
> > potential for growth of our content - the major focus of the mission of
> the
> > Wikimedia Foundation.  Figuring out how to grow these projects within the
> > founding principles is not just important

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Jane Darnell]

All I said is that the wiki way works, that's all. You can't hide it when
someone tries to take over a project, and that is the reason we shouldn't
try to anticipate that with convoluted strategies. "Assume Good Faith" will
always win out over any strange misguided takeover strategy, which is why
governments that intend to do such things choose nowadays to just block
wikimedia altogether. It is not our wake-up call to take, but that of the
Kazakh people.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Risker  wrote:

> On 28 December 2015 at 11:22, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>
> > Anyone can exploit the content on WMF for their needs. What I mean by "it
> > works" is that you can't fool people when you try to change Wikipedia to
> > fit government policy. We can easily identify problematic edits. Never
> > underestimate the diaspora of any country. Wikimedia is always bigger
> than
> > any one government will ever estimate.
> >
> >
>
> Well, yes, anyone can exploit the content of WMF projects; we don't usually
> give them kudos for doing so, though.  And you most certainly CAN fool
> people when you change Wikipedia to change government policy, if the
> government overwhelms a small "traditional" Wikipedia community with
> bribes, threats to well-being and good old fashioned paid editing.  The
> Wikipedia brand is perceived to be independent from such influences; that
> it isn't in this case (and who knows how many other cases) cannot be
> perceived by readers who do not have any alternative resources.
>
> Small communities with less than 50 active editors can be pretty easily
> swamped; a university class adding valuable, well sourced and researched
> content may have a positive effect, just as focused addition of heavily
> biased material by "editing for reward" (rewards including payment, gifts,
> or simply not being incarcerated) can turn a Wikipedia into a platform for
> third parties.This particular project was an easy target, and there are
> many others that could similarly be overwhelmed.  We need to recognize that
> most of the world does not live under the conditions that encourage or even
> permit the development of freely available information. As a global
> community we need to stop pretending that the example of Kazakh Wikipedia
> is not a major and significant bellwether that requires very serious review
> of how we encourage and  develop projects centered in countries with
> repressive regimes.  Many of these regions are areas with significant
> potential for growth of our content - the major focus of the mission of the
> Wikimedia Foundation.  Figuring out how to grow these projects within the
> founding principles is not just important, it's necessary.
>
> Risker/Anne
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] “Reliable”, “Notable”, and “Encyclopaedic” Sources for Automated Solvers for FreeCell

[Pine W]

Hi Shlomi,

I would suggest posting those questions on the talk page of the article,
and/or at WP:RSN.

Pine

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Shlomi Fish  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> in case you don't know, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeCell is a
> single-player card game, that became popular after being included in
> some versions of Microsoft Windows. Now, the English Wikipedia entry about
> it
> used to contain during at least two times in the past, some relatively
> short
> sections about several automated solvers that have been written for it.
> However, they were removed due to being considered "non-notable" or
> "non-Encyclopaedic".
>
> Right now there's only this section -
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeCell#Solver_complexity which talks
> about the
> fact that FreeCell was proved to be NP-complete.
>
> I talked about it with a friend, and he told me I should try to get a
> "reliable source" news outlet/newspaper to write about such solvers
> (including
> I should add my own over at http://fc-solve.shlomifish.org/ , though the
> sections on the FreeCell Wikipedia entry did not exclusively cover it.).
>
> Recently I stumbled upon this paper written by three computer scientists,
> then
> at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev:
>
> *
>
> http://www.genetic-programming.org/hc2011/06-Elyasaf-Hauptmann-Sipper/Elyasaf-Hauptmann-Sipper-Paper.pdf
>
> * There's some analysis of this paper in this thread in the
> fc-solve-discuss
> Yahoo Group:
>
>
> https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fc-solve-discuss/conversations/messages/1388
>
> The solver mentioned in the paper can solve 98% of the first 32,000
> Microsoft
> FreeCell deals. However, several hobbyist solvers (= solvers that were
> written
> outside the Academia and may incorporate techniques that are less
> fashionable
> there, and that were not submitted for Academic peer review) that were
> written
> by the time the article published, have been able to solve all deals in the
> first MS 32,000 deals except one (#11,982), which is widely believed to be
> impossible, and which they fully traverse without a solution.
>
> Finally, I should note that I've written a Perl 5/CPAN distribution to
> verify
> that the FreeCell solutions generated by my solver (and with some potential
> future work - other solvers) are correct, and I can run it on the output of
> my solver on the MS 32,000 deals on my Core i3 machine in between 3 and 4
> minutes.[Verification]
>
> ===
>
> Now my questions are:
>
> 1. Can this paper be considered a reliable, notable, and/or Encyclopaedic
> source
> that can hopefully deter and prevent future Deletionism?
>
> 2. Can I cite the fc-solve-discuss’s thread mentioning the fact that there
> are
> hobbyist solvers in question that perform better in this respect - just for
> "Encyclopaedic" completeness sake, because the scientific paper in question
> does not mention them at all.
>
> ===
>
> Sorry this E-mail was quite long, but I wanted to present all the facts.
> As you
> can tell, I've become quite frustrated at Wikipedia deletionism and the
> hoops
> one has to overcome in order to cope with them.
>
> Regards,
>
> Shlomi Fish
>
>
> [Verification] - one note is that all these programs were not
> verified/proved
> as correct by a proof verifier such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coq
> , so
> there is a small possibility that they have insurmountable bugs. Note that
> I
> did write some automated tests for them.
>
> --
> -
> Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
> What Makes Software Apps High Quality -  http://shlom.in/sw-quality
>
> The three principal virtues of a programmer are Laziness, Impatience, and
> Hubris.
> — http://perldoc.perl.org/perl.html
>
> Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Risker]

On 28 December 2015 at 11:22, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> Anyone can exploit the content on WMF for their needs. What I mean by "it
> works" is that you can't fool people when you try to change Wikipedia to
> fit government policy. We can easily identify problematic edits. Never
> underestimate the diaspora of any country. Wikimedia is always bigger than
> any one government will ever estimate.
>
>

Well, yes, anyone can exploit the content of WMF projects; we don't usually
give them kudos for doing so, though.  And you most certainly CAN fool
people when you change Wikipedia to change government policy, if the
government overwhelms a small "traditional" Wikipedia community with
bribes, threats to well-being and good old fashioned paid editing.  The
Wikipedia brand is perceived to be independent from such influences; that
it isn't in this case (and who knows how many other cases) cannot be
perceived by readers who do not have any alternative resources.

Small communities with less than 50 active editors can be pretty easily
swamped; a university class adding valuable, well sourced and researched
content may have a positive effect, just as focused addition of heavily
biased material by "editing for reward" (rewards including payment, gifts,
or simply not being incarcerated) can turn a Wikipedia into a platform for
third parties.This particular project was an easy target, and there are
many others that could similarly be overwhelmed.  We need to recognize that
most of the world does not live under the conditions that encourage or even
permit the development of freely available information. As a global
community we need to stop pretending that the example of Kazakh Wikipedia
is not a major and significant bellwether that requires very serious review
of how we encourage and  develop projects centered in countries with
repressive regimes.  Many of these regions are areas with significant
potential for growth of our content - the major focus of the mission of the
Wikimedia Foundation.  Figuring out how to grow these projects within the
founding principles is not just important, it's necessary.

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

[Wikimedia-l] “Reliable”, “Notable”, and “Encyclopaedic” Sources for Automated Solvers for FreeCell

[Shlomi Fish]

Hi all,

in case you don't know, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeCell is a
single-player card game, that became popular after being included in
some versions of Microsoft Windows. Now, the English Wikipedia entry about it
used to contain during at least two times in the past, some relatively short
sections about several automated solvers that have been written for it.
However, they were removed due to being considered "non-notable" or
"non-Encyclopaedic".

Right now there's only this section -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeCell#Solver_complexity which talks about the
fact that FreeCell was proved to be NP-complete. 

I talked about it with a friend, and he told me I should try to get a
"reliable source" news outlet/newspaper to write about such solvers (including
I should add my own over at http://fc-solve.shlomifish.org/ , though the
sections on the FreeCell Wikipedia entry did not exclusively cover it.).

Recently I stumbled upon this paper written by three computer scientists, then
at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev:

*
http://www.genetic-programming.org/hc2011/06-Elyasaf-Hauptmann-Sipper/Elyasaf-Hauptmann-Sipper-Paper.pdf

* There's some analysis of this paper in this thread in the fc-solve-discuss
Yahoo Group:

https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/fc-solve-discuss/conversations/messages/1388

The solver mentioned in the paper can solve 98% of the first 32,000 Microsoft
FreeCell deals. However, several hobbyist solvers (= solvers that were written
outside the Academia and may incorporate techniques that are less fashionable
there, and that were not submitted for Academic peer review) that were written
by the time the article published, have been able to solve all deals in the
first MS 32,000 deals except one (#11,982), which is widely believed to be
impossible, and which they fully traverse without a solution.

Finally, I should note that I've written a Perl 5/CPAN distribution to verify
that the FreeCell solutions generated by my solver (and with some potential
future work - other solvers) are correct, and I can run it on the output of
my solver on the MS 32,000 deals on my Core i3 machine in between 3 and 4
minutes.[Verification]

===

Now my questions are:

1. Can this paper be considered a reliable, notable, and/or Encyclopaedic source
that can hopefully deter and prevent future Deletionism?

2. Can I cite the fc-solve-discuss’s thread mentioning the fact that there are
hobbyist solvers in question that perform better in this respect - just for
"Encyclopaedic" completeness sake, because the scientific paper in question
does not mention them at all.

===

Sorry this E-mail was quite long, but I wanted to present all the facts. As you
can tell, I've become quite frustrated at Wikipedia deletionism and the hoops
one has to overcome in order to cope with them.

Regards,

Shlomi Fish


[Verification] - one note is that all these programs were not verified/proved
as correct by a proof verifier such as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coq , so
there is a small possibility that they have insurmountable bugs. Note that I
did write some automated tests for them.

-- 
-
Shlomi Fish   http://www.shlomifish.org/
What Makes Software Apps High Quality -  http://shlom.in/sw-quality

The three principal virtues of a programmer are Laziness, Impatience, and
Hubris.
— http://perldoc.perl.org/perl.html

Please reply to list if it's a mailing list post - http://shlom.in/reply .

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Jane Darnell]

Anyone can exploit the content on WMF for their needs. What I mean by "it
works" is that you can't fool people when you try to change Wikipedia to
fit government policy. We can easily identify problematic edits. Never
underestimate the diaspora of any country. Wikimedia is always bigger than
any one government will ever estimate.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>
> > If anything, the Kazakh thing just proves that the wiki model works. No
> > shame in that. It's probably why the Chinese are blocking Wikipedia and
> not
> > embracing it. You can't hide your propaganda, even from your own people.
> >
>
>
> Jane,
>
> You don't seem to understand what's happening here. Kazakhstan is in the
> process of replicating the Chinese "Great Firewall" for its own citizens,
> using slightly different means. From a recent report in the New York
> Times:[1]
>
> ---o0o---
>
> Unlike with China, which filters data through an expensive and complex
> digital infrastructure known as the Great Firewall, security experts say
> Kazakhstan is trying to achieve the same effect at a lower cost. The
> country is mandating that its citizens install a new "national security
> certificate" on their computers and smartphones that will intercept
> requests to and from foreign websites.
>
> That gives officials the opportunity to read encrypted traffic between
> Kazakh users and foreign servers, in what security experts call a "man in
> the middle attack."
>
> As a result, Kazakh telecom operators, and government officials, will be
> privy to mobile and web traffic between Kazakh users and foreign servers,
> bypassing encryption protections known as S.S.L., or Secure Sockets Layer,
> and H.T.T.P.S., technology that encrypts browsing sessions and is familiar
> to users by the tiny padlock icon that appears in browsers.
>
> ---o0o---
>
> Do you understand what this means? The Kazakh government will be *able to
> identify any Kazakh citizen who edits Wikipedia, and see what they did
> there.* Even if you go into an Internet café in that country, you have to
> give your name, and your activities will be monitored. That is a major
> chilling effect.
>
> So you now have a situation where the government-published encyclopedia,
> with its own bent on the country's history and government, is in the Kazakh
> Wikipedia, appearing under the Wikipedia brand name. It was put there by
> volunteers who were promised laptops and other prizes for their work
> transcribing these articles.
>
> This was an effort that WMF board members went out of their way to praise
> and reward, even though it's always been clear, since June 2011, when state
> support was announced, that Wikibilim was a Kazakh government-sponsored
> effort. Wikibilim's Kazakh Wikipedia project is publicly described as
> "implemented under the auspices of the Prime Minister of Kazakhstan."[2]
>
> Ting Chen, then chairman of the WMF board, even participated in a press
> conference with Kazakh government representatives and functionaries. Yet
> Wikibilim reportedly had a trademark licence agreement with the Wikimedia
> Foundation within a month of the organisation's founding,[3] something I
> believe most regular chapters have to wait a lot longer for, and was
> immediately hailed as a future chapter.
>
> At Wikimania 2011, this was followed by Wales' "Wikipedian of the Year"
> award for Wikibilim, which was widely publicised by the Kazakh government.
> What could be better PR for them than an endorsement by a free-speech
> figure like Jimmy Wales?
>
> Yet it's long been established that Wikibilim's leaders have been and are
> part of the Kazakh government machine. One is now the vice-governor of a
> major province in the country,[4] and the founding director of a
> Brussels-based think tank that human rights organisations consider a PR
> front for the regime.[5][6] Another went on to become Vice Chairman of the
> company that runs the Kazakh Prime Minister's website; he is at the same
> time an active editor and one of a small number of administrators in the
> Kazakh Wikipedia.
>
> The country's opposition press has been shut down. Even when remnants of it
> still existed, it was clear that opposition papers would not be considered
> "reliable sources" in the Kazakh Wikipedia.
>
> If this proves that the "wiki model works", then it can only mean that it
> "works" in the sense that dictatorships can very smartly exploit it for
> their own ends--in this case, with apparent WMF connivance. (I would really
> like to know who, if anyone, advised the WMF on this at the time.)
>
> China has its own internet encyclopedias that it controls in a similar
> manner. They have no need for Wikipedia. They have two crowdsourced
> internet encyclopedias that are bigger even than the English Wikipedia, and
> positively dwarf the Chinese Wikipedia.
>
> However, there is significant government interest in Wikipedia in other
> Asian c

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Andreas Kolbe]

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> If anything, the Kazakh thing just proves that the wiki model works. No
> shame in that. It's probably why the Chinese are blocking Wikipedia and not
> embracing it. You can't hide your propaganda, even from your own people.
>


Jane,

You don't seem to understand what's happening here. Kazakhstan is in the
process of replicating the Chinese "Great Firewall" for its own citizens,
using slightly different means. From a recent report in the New York
Times:[1]

---o0o---

Unlike with China, which filters data through an expensive and complex
digital infrastructure known as the Great Firewall, security experts say
Kazakhstan is trying to achieve the same effect at a lower cost. The
country is mandating that its citizens install a new "national security
certificate" on their computers and smartphones that will intercept
requests to and from foreign websites.

That gives officials the opportunity to read encrypted traffic between
Kazakh users and foreign servers, in what security experts call a "man in
the middle attack."

As a result, Kazakh telecom operators, and government officials, will be
privy to mobile and web traffic between Kazakh users and foreign servers,
bypassing encryption protections known as S.S.L., or Secure Sockets Layer,
and H.T.T.P.S., technology that encrypts browsing sessions and is familiar
to users by the tiny padlock icon that appears in browsers.

---o0o---

Do you understand what this means? The Kazakh government will be *able to
identify any Kazakh citizen who edits Wikipedia, and see what they did
there.* Even if you go into an Internet café in that country, you have to
give your name, and your activities will be monitored. That is a major
chilling effect.

So you now have a situation where the government-published encyclopedia,
with its own bent on the country's history and government, is in the Kazakh
Wikipedia, appearing under the Wikipedia brand name. It was put there by
volunteers who were promised laptops and other prizes for their work
transcribing these articles.

This was an effort that WMF board members went out of their way to praise
and reward, even though it's always been clear, since June 2011, when state
support was announced, that Wikibilim was a Kazakh government-sponsored
effort. Wikibilim's Kazakh Wikipedia project is publicly described as
"implemented under the auspices of the Prime Minister of Kazakhstan."[2]

Ting Chen, then chairman of the WMF board, even participated in a press
conference with Kazakh government representatives and functionaries. Yet
Wikibilim reportedly had a trademark licence agreement with the Wikimedia
Foundation within a month of the organisation's founding,[3] something I
believe most regular chapters have to wait a lot longer for, and was
immediately hailed as a future chapter.

At Wikimania 2011, this was followed by Wales' "Wikipedian of the Year"
award for Wikibilim, which was widely publicised by the Kazakh government.
What could be better PR for them than an endorsement by a free-speech
figure like Jimmy Wales?

Yet it's long been established that Wikibilim's leaders have been and are
part of the Kazakh government machine. One is now the vice-governor of a
major province in the country,[4] and the founding director of a
Brussels-based think tank that human rights organisations consider a PR
front for the regime.[5][6] Another went on to become Vice Chairman of the
company that runs the Kazakh Prime Minister's website; he is at the same
time an active editor and one of a small number of administrators in the
Kazakh Wikipedia.

The country's opposition press has been shut down. Even when remnants of it
still existed, it was clear that opposition papers would not be considered
"reliable sources" in the Kazakh Wikipedia.

If this proves that the "wiki model works", then it can only mean that it
"works" in the sense that dictatorships can very smartly exploit it for
their own ends--in this case, with apparent WMF connivance. (I would really
like to know who, if anyone, advised the WMF on this at the time.)

China has its own internet encyclopedias that it controls in a similar
manner. They have no need for Wikipedia. They have two crowdsourced
internet encyclopedias that are bigger even than the English Wikipedia, and
positively dwarf the Chinese Wikipedia.

However, there is significant government interest in Wikipedia in other
Asian countries.

What the WMF should do is to start examining to what extent these
Wikipedias are functionally censored, using the services of linguists and
political/human rights experts.

I have long advocated that there should be a Wikipedia Freedom Index[7]
indicating to the reader how free of censorship any Wikipedia is. Where a
Wikipedia is found to suffer from significant problems, the WMF should
place server-side banners on its pages, in the local language and English,
alerting readers to this fact and suggesting that they should also consult
oth

[Wikimedia-l] next Wikidata office hour on January 21st

[Lydia Pintscher]

Hey folks :)

I'll be doing another office hour to talk about all things Wikidata.
As usual I'll give an overview of the past 3 months and what's ahead.
It'll be in #wikimedia-office on Freenode. It'll be on January 21st at
17:00 UTC. For your timezone please see
https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?hour=17&min=00&sec=0&day=21&month=01&year=2016.


Cheers
Lydia

-- 
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Product Manager for Wikidata

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24
10963 Berlin
www.wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.

Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Jane Darnell]

If anything, the Kazakh thing just proves that the wiki model works. No
shame in that. It's probably why the Chinese are blocking Wikipedia and not
embracing it. You can't hide your propaganda, even from your own people.

As far as the compilation of Christmas songs goes, the list of songs is not
copyrightable, because the sort order of a list is not creative (unless
it's something that becomes poetry when you read the titles as a list).

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Andreas Kolbe  wrote:

> Pete,
>
> Thanks. Comments interspersed below.
>
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Pete Forsyth 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > I'd say the better question, is "what legal or moral right would we call
> > upon to *insist* on having the same for Wikidata?" If we had a clear
> answer
> > to that one, it would really move forward; but I don't think we do, or if
> > we do, it's not yet clear to me.
> >
>
>
> The same as in the case of Wikipedia.
>
> Is Wikidata different because it aspires to listing machine-readable facts
> only, rather than written expositions? Not to my mind, because facts are
> frequently debatable, and their presentation and sourcing involves choice
> and expertise.
>
> Moreover, speaking somewhat less seriously for a moment, Wikidata doesn't
> actually just contain non-copyrightable facts. As we've seen, it contains
> some of the same hoaxes and errors Wikipedia contains, which are by
> definition creative. It's an entertaining fact that dictionary publishers
> would in the past (perhaps they still do it now) include a small number of
> hoax entries -- made-up words -- in their dictionaries, so they would be
> able to demonstrate that another dictionary publisher had simply copied
> their work. The Wikidata project is (involuntarily of course) doing the
> same.
>
>
>
> > No, and I should have been clearer -- I do see the general advantage in a
> > site providing information about the source of information (of course).
> > What I don't see is the advantage of requiring them to do so in a certain
> > way.
> >
>
>
> Personally, I wouldn't insist on it being done in a certain way. I only
> feel, very strongly, that having no information at all about the source of
> information is very much undesirable, for the reasons previously mentioned
> (data provenance, providing a bridge to potential users, etc.).
>
>
>
> > I don't think Google or Bing aspires to having the highest standard of
> > credibility. If they are useful, their business interests have been
> served,
> > and I would hope that no student or academic would be able to cite the
> > Google Knowledge Graph in a formal paper, any more than they could cite
> > Wikipedia. (caveat emptor)
> >
>
>
> The problem with free information is that it displaces non-free
> information, much like a cheaper product displaces a more expensive one.
> We've seen this with Wikipedia replacing professionally published
> encyclopedias.
>
> Free information tends to become pervasive. This pervasiveness creates a
> steady drip effect – if a certain item of information becomes ubiquitous,
> so you see it in Google, in Bing, and elsewhere, you don't question it any
> more after a while. And once information becomes unquestioned, it enters
> more credible sources, because the authors of those are human, too. People
> cannot be on their guard 24/7, questioning everything they see. This is how
> citogenesis happens.
>
> I'm currently thinking about the Kazakh Wikipedia again, as the topic has
> (rightly) reappeared on Jimmy Wales' talk page.[1] It provides a good
> example. I believe the reason the Kazakh dictatorship embraced Creative
> Commons, releasing its Kazakh National Encyclopedia under a free licence so
> its articles could be imported *en masse* into the Kazakh Wikipedia (by
> editors incentivised by the chance to win laptops etc.), was because that
> encyclopedia reflected the regime's political views and censorship
> criteria. If you make your information ubiquitous, ensuring it appears
> under different brand names, with its real provenance obscured, eventually
> it will not be questioned any more.
>
> The WMF allowed itself to be used there, enthusiastically so. To me it's
> one of the most shameful episodes in its history.
>
>
>
> > I believe in the agency of multiple people and entities in curating
> > knowledge. Individuals, and individual information projects, should have
> > the ability to make their own judgment about how much, and what kind, of
> > citation is required for their purposes. I don't believe that information
> > curation can be perfected by anticipating all needs in policy and legal
> > documents.
> >
> > If our users have a moral or legal right that needs to be defended, we
> > should do so. But I don't see one in this case (perhaps a clear
> > hypothetical example could help?)
> >
>
>
> Some users certainly feel very strongly that they have moral rights they
> would like to see upheld. See the discussion at
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tal

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AWB & Ubuntu: Can really someone help?

[Asaf Bartov]

I have recently been able to make it work under WINE, and have updated the
documentation page accordingly[1].  It did take a series of winetricks(1)
incantations to get it to work.  It's quite brittle.  In particular, make
sure you're specifying WINARCH=32.

   A.

[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Mono_and_Wine&diff=681340924&oldid=681113160


On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 2:39 AM, Fæ  wrote:

> It's been several years since I used AWB for anything serious, precisely
> because it only runs under Windows.
>
> The conventional advice is to run it in a windows emulator, such as Wine,
> Parallels or Virtualbox. Folks talk about porting it, but I suspect this
> will never happen.
>
> Fae
> On 28 Dec 2015 10:36, "Tito Dutta"  wrote:
>
> > In last 2 years I have contacted every help section from AWB talk page,
> > Ubuntu help forum etc.
> > Trying this medium as well:
> > Can someone tell me how to use AWB on Ubuntu?
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: 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
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Asaf Bartov
Wikimedia Foundation 

Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the
sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
https://donate.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

[Andreas Kolbe]

Pete,

Thanks. Comments interspersed below.

On Sat, Dec 26, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Pete Forsyth  wrote:

>
> I'd say the better question, is "what legal or moral right would we call
> upon to *insist* on having the same for Wikidata?" If we had a clear answer
> to that one, it would really move forward; but I don't think we do, or if
> we do, it's not yet clear to me.
>


The same as in the case of Wikipedia.

Is Wikidata different because it aspires to listing machine-readable facts
only, rather than written expositions? Not to my mind, because facts are
frequently debatable, and their presentation and sourcing involves choice
and expertise.

Moreover, speaking somewhat less seriously for a moment, Wikidata doesn't
actually just contain non-copyrightable facts. As we've seen, it contains
some of the same hoaxes and errors Wikipedia contains, which are by
definition creative. It's an entertaining fact that dictionary publishers
would in the past (perhaps they still do it now) include a small number of
hoax entries -- made-up words -- in their dictionaries, so they would be
able to demonstrate that another dictionary publisher had simply copied
their work. The Wikidata project is (involuntarily of course) doing the
same.



> No, and I should have been clearer -- I do see the general advantage in a
> site providing information about the source of information (of course).
> What I don't see is the advantage of requiring them to do so in a certain
> way.
>


Personally, I wouldn't insist on it being done in a certain way. I only
feel, very strongly, that having no information at all about the source of
information is very much undesirable, for the reasons previously mentioned
(data provenance, providing a bridge to potential users, etc.).



> I don't think Google or Bing aspires to having the highest standard of
> credibility. If they are useful, their business interests have been served,
> and I would hope that no student or academic would be able to cite the
> Google Knowledge Graph in a formal paper, any more than they could cite
> Wikipedia. (caveat emptor)
>


The problem with free information is that it displaces non-free
information, much like a cheaper product displaces a more expensive one.
We've seen this with Wikipedia replacing professionally published
encyclopedias.

Free information tends to become pervasive. This pervasiveness creates a
steady drip effect – if a certain item of information becomes ubiquitous,
so you see it in Google, in Bing, and elsewhere, you don't question it any
more after a while. And once information becomes unquestioned, it enters
more credible sources, because the authors of those are human, too. People
cannot be on their guard 24/7, questioning everything they see. This is how
citogenesis happens.

I'm currently thinking about the Kazakh Wikipedia again, as the topic has
(rightly) reappeared on Jimmy Wales' talk page.[1] It provides a good
example. I believe the reason the Kazakh dictatorship embraced Creative
Commons, releasing its Kazakh National Encyclopedia under a free licence so
its articles could be imported *en masse* into the Kazakh Wikipedia (by
editors incentivised by the chance to win laptops etc.), was because that
encyclopedia reflected the regime's political views and censorship
criteria. If you make your information ubiquitous, ensuring it appears
under different brand names, with its real provenance obscured, eventually
it will not be questioned any more.

The WMF allowed itself to be used there, enthusiastically so. To me it's
one of the most shameful episodes in its history.



> I believe in the agency of multiple people and entities in curating
> knowledge. Individuals, and individual information projects, should have
> the ability to make their own judgment about how much, and what kind, of
> citation is required for their purposes. I don't believe that information
> curation can be perfected by anticipating all needs in policy and legal
> documents.
>
> If our users have a moral or legal right that needs to be defended, we
> should do so. But I don't see one in this case (perhaps a clear
> hypothetical example could help?)
>


Some users certainly feel very strongly that they have moral rights they
would like to see upheld. See the discussion at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikidata#Is_CC_the_right_license_for_data.3F
for examples.



> > See
> >
> >
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Database_Rights#The_legal_definition_of_.E2.80.9Cdatabase.E2.80.9D
> >
> > 
>
> So according to that page, created by Wikimedia legal staff, databases may
> > be protected even by US copyright law as "compilations". In the EU (is
> > Wikidata currently based in the EU, given that it's a Wikimedia
> Deutschland
> > project?) the protections are still more stringent. As I understand it,
> the
> > community as a whole holds the copyright, but you'd have to check with
> > Foundation legal staff or some other lawyer to be sure.
>
>
> Helpful link, thank you.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AWB & Ubuntu: Can really someone help?

[Jane Darnell]

I used to use AWB for lists but now I am running on a Mac so I don't have
it anymore. I still can generate lists with Catscan though, so you may want
to check that tool out if you haven't already.

On Mon, Dec 28, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Tito Dutta  wrote:

> In last 2 years I have contacted every help section from AWB talk page,
> Ubuntu help forum etc.
> Trying this medium as well:
> Can someone tell me how to use AWB on Ubuntu?
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] AWB & Ubuntu: Can really someone help?

[Fæ]

It's been several years since I used AWB for anything serious, precisely
because it only runs under Windows.

The conventional advice is to run it in a windows emulator, such as Wine,
Parallels or Virtualbox. Folks talk about porting it, but I suspect this
will never happen.

Fae
On 28 Dec 2015 10:36, "Tito Dutta"  wrote:

> In last 2 years I have contacted every help section from AWB talk page,
> Ubuntu help forum etc.
> Trying this medium as well:
> Can someone tell me how to use AWB on Ubuntu?
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: 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
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] AWB & Ubuntu: Can really someone help?

[Tito Dutta]

In last 2 years I have contacted every help section from AWB talk page,
Ubuntu help forum etc.
Trying this medium as well:
Can someone tell me how to use AWB on Ubuntu?
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,