Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] WMAU update

[Biyanto Rebin]

Congratulations for WMAU!



2016-11-19 6:32 GMT+07:00 Gnangarra :

> Following the AGM of Wikimedia Australia we wish to announce the committee
> for 2016-17 and reports
>
> President: Gideon Digby(unchanged)
> Vice President: Pru Mitchell(unchanged)
> Secretary:Tom Hogarth
> Treasurer: Robert Myers
> General members: Caddie Brain
>
> Departed: Andrew Owens, Steve Crossin, Charles Gregory
>
> 2016 Annual report:  https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_chapters/
> Reports/Wikimedia_Australia/2016/Annual_Report
> 2015-16 Financial report : https://wikimedia.org.au/
> wiki/File:Wikimedia_Australia_Inc._-_Balance_Sheet_2015-16.pdf
>
> --
> Gideon Digby
> President - Wikimedia Australia
> M: 0434 986 852
> gnanga...@wikimedia.org.au
> http://wikimedia.org.au
>
> Wikimedia Australia Inc. is an independent charitable organisation which
> supports the efforts of the Wikimedia Foundation in Australia. Your
> donations keep the Wikimedia mission alive.
> *http://wikimedia.org.au/Donate *
>
>
>
> ___
> Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately
> directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia
> community. For more information about Wikimedia-l:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> ___
> WikimediaAnnounce-l mailing list
> wikimediaannounc...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaannounce-l
>
>


-- 

Biyanto Rebin | Ketua Umum (*Chair*) 2016-2018
Wikimedia Indonesia
Nomor Ponsel: +62 8989 037379
Surel: biyanto.re...@wikimedia.or.id


Dukung upaya kami membebaskan pengetahuan:
http://wikimedia.or.id/wiki/Wikimedia_Indonesia:Donasi
___
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] Invitation to review: Design Statement of Purpose

[Arthur Richards]

Hi Isarra, somehow I missed your email from the 16th and only just noticed
it when I saw Kevin's response, which I think is totally spot on. I've
added some additional responses inline below:

On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 4:16 PM Isarra Yos  wrote:

> Okay, so you want to clarify... something, and build trust. What needs
> clarifying? What has been unclear? For whom, and building trust with
> whom? Are these even the right questions?
>

I mentioned this in my previous response:
"With the statement itself, we seek to gain clarity and shared
understanding about what design at the WMF is here for and trying to
achieve (at a big-picture level). Through the process of defining the
statement of purpose, we hope to build trust amongst the design group and
with their principle stakeholders."

So - what's been unclear? What it is exactly that design at the WMF is
trying to achieve at a big-picture level. Who are we trying to build trust
with?
Amongst people in the design group as well as their stakeholders (like
product managers and software developers at the WMF, users and folks in the
Wikimedia community).


> A problem here, from what you're saying, seems to be that things with
> Design have been historically overly complicated/confused, and there
> hasn't been good communication with other teams, with the community,
> even within Design itself. Though a step in the right direction, this
> seems to me like a continuation of that pattern, frankly. The more big
> words you use, the more passive voice, the more overarching 'themes' and
> less direct problem statements, the more you distance yourselves from
> what you're doing and who you're working with, and I would if anything
> strongly recommend the opposite. Keep it simple.
>

Thanks for this feedback, it's helpful for me to hear. Do you think that
the draft statement of purpose itself is overly complicated, or is it that
the way we have been talking about this stuff (like on this thread) is
overly complicated?
___
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] Invitation to review: Design Statement of Purpose

[Arthur Richards]

Hi everyone, a friendly reminder that if you would like to share your
perspective on the draft statement of purpose
, please do so
no later than this coming Sunday, 27 November, 2016.

Big thanks to everyone who has been a part of the discussion so far :)

On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:40 AM Keegan Peterzell 
wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> Over the past few months the Design team members at the Wikimedia
> Foundation (user experience [UX] designers, design researchers, user
> experience engineers, and communications) have been working with Arthur
> Richards from the Team Practices Group to identify the high-level themes
> that motivate design at the WMF. These themes have been turned into a brief
> statement of purpose, whose intent is to articulate the vision and purpose
> behind design at the WMF. This statement will influence the future
> direction of design work.
>
> At this point the stakeholders are ready for a review of the draft
> statement. The purpose of this review is to gather a common understanding
> of its purpose, and to identify any key themes that may be missing from the
> high-level discussion. On the wiki page for the statement, you'll find
> these themes and what they encompass in the "Background" section. If you
> have an observation, comment, or concern about what is listed there, please
> bring it up on the talk page. If it is relevant to the review and
> understanding of the statement, it will be looked at for future drafts. If
> there are comments about design and the design process in general, we'll
> hold on to those until a time when they can be addressed for the broader
> discussion of design in general.
>
> All that said, here are the links:
> * 
> * 
>
> We look forward to seeing you on the wiki.
> --
> Keegan Peterzell
> Technical Collaboration Specialist
> 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] Invitation to review: Design Statement of Purpose

[Kevin Smith]

I have only been peripherally involved with the process leading to this
draft statement. My perception is that this statement is merely the first
step, to lay a foundation for shared understanding. Once that has happened,
then more interesting details will come. If this baby step is
non-controversial, great. Any concrete actions and details will follow as
separate documents (or other channels).

As for why this is necessary, consider the wording from the statement that
they aim to make sharing knowledge "easy and joyful for everyone". That
probably hasn't been expressed before, or discussed. While some might
disagree that it's the right thing to do, it seems healthy to be
transparent that it is the intent of design folks at the foundation.

Similarly, I appreciate knowing that the design folks advocate "rigorous
research, and exploring innovative solutions". If nothing else, it might
explain why a study is proposed, or why a new "crazy" off-the-wall idea is
being floated out for feedback.

If you ignore all the prefacing and themes on that page, the actual
statement is fewer than 75 words, in 4 sentences. It seems pretty simple to
me, without a lot of jargon, passive voice, etc. It is high-level,
intentionally.



Kevin Smith
Agile Coach, Wikimedia Foundation


On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Isarra Yos  wrote:

> Okay, so you want to clarify... something, and build trust. What needs
> clarifying? What has been unclear? For whom, and building trust with whom?
> Are these even the right questions?
>
> A problem here, from what you're saying, seems to be that things with
> Design have been historically overly complicated/confused, and there hasn't
> been good communication with other teams, with the community, even within
> Design itself. Though a step in the right direction, this seems to me like
> a continuation of that pattern, frankly. The more big words you use, the
> more passive voice, the more overarching 'themes' and less direct problem
> statements, the more you distance yourselves from what you're doing and who
> you're working with, and I would if anything strongly recommend the
> opposite. Keep it simple.
>
> Your general purpose should be to make things... better. But what that
> means depends on what your problems are, so your problems are what you need
> to do work to sort out. That way you can address the problems, and move
> forward.
>
> So what are the problems? How will you address them? And in order to
> define these problems, for that matter, what's your scope?
>
> -I
>
>
> On 10/11/16 20:36, Arthur Richards wrote:
>
>> Hi Isarra, thanks for the excellent questions. Here's my attempt to answer
>> them:
>>
>> The purpose of the statement of purpose is to gain clarity and build trust
>> within the design group and with their principle stakeholders. With the
>> statement itself, we seek to gain clarity and shared understanding about
>> what design at the WMF is here for and trying to achieve (at a big-picture
>> level). Through the process of defining the statement of purpose, we hope
>> to build trust amongst the design group and with their principle
>> stakeholders. So, the primary audience for this document is the design
>> group itself, with the stakeholders of design being a secondary audience.
>>
>> Moving forward, that is once the statement of purpose is done, design can
>> take a close look at where it is now relative to where it wants to be as
>> defined by the statement of purpose. Design can then use that difference
>> to
>> help make decisions about how we get from here to there (for instance to
>> help in making decisions about staffing, structure, involvement in product
>> teams, how to approach design problems, and so on).
>>
>> Long story short, the statement of purpose is intended to be an organizing
>> tool - to create clarity through everyone understanding the purpose, and
>> trust by going through a collaborative process of definition amongst
>> design
>> and their stakeholders - so that they can execute better and with
>> decreased
>> friction.
>>
>> A little more background and history:
>> As the Foundation has evolved over the years, there have been many
>> challenges and pain points around figuring out how design should function
>> and how it should be integrated into the various facets of the
>> organization
>> (from product development to communications). Through all of the attempts
>> to address those challenges and pain points over the years, it's become
>> clear that the role and purpose of design is not well understood - at
>> least
>> not in a shared and consistent way, which makes it nearly impossible to
>> find the right and lasting solutions. A few months ago, the Team Practices
>> Group was asked to help identify and resolve the major pain points - after
>> doing research, we agreed in conjunction with the design group that we
>> should pursue clarifying the purpose of design and validate it with their
>> stakeholders.
>>
>> Does 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[rupert THURNER]

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:47 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you could
> argue that a technical code of conduct is needed. When you consider the
> actual context, however, it becomes pretty clear that this is unnecessary
> bureaucracy. The repeated concerns about outsized influence by
> Wikimedia Foundation employees have largely gone ignored.
>
i think so too. common sense replaces a lot of rules and policies :) donors
money is imo better invested in writing good software supporting the
mission than making policies. we have enough policies and rules of all
kind, being a burden when contriuting, especially to newbies. i get a
chicken skin of fright when i read the collaboration teams plans of putting
bureaucracy into software, talking about "the largest wikis have the most
complex workflows". the most complex and stable workflow i know is in
wikinews, and we all know that wikinews died. i would really love if
"collaboration" would be the main topic, not "process" and "rule". this is
just so against the basic "wiki" idea, our core value.

best
rupert
___
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] Chief Talent and Culture | Job Description

[Amy Elder]

Hi all,

Over the past few weeks, we have been working with Talent and Culture,
Staff and executive teams to develop a job description (below) for the
role. I would like to share it with you early as well, before the
process starts.
I am very grateful to our staff and leaders here at the WMF for
collaborating on both the description and the process.

We also wanted to let you know that we’re beginning a process with Kathleen
Yazbak from ViewCrest, to vet internal/interim C-level candidates.  As you
may recall, Kathleen helped vet Katherine as ED with the support of an
internal team including Katie Horn and Lisa Gruwell. Kathleen took the time
to understand our context, our culture, and meet with relevant stakeholders
so to:



   -

   Create a fair, consistent and timely process,
   -

   Create a process that is transparent to staff, and therefore trustworthy,
   -

   Keep interim leadership informed and engaged.


Talent & Culture and General Counsel roles will be the first to pilot the
process. We've written the JDs for both with an eye for consistency across
executive roles.

Thanks for engaging!


Best,

Amy


Job Title

Chief Talent and Culture Officer

Summary

The Wikimedia Foundation is looking for a creative and collaborative Chief
Talent and Culture Officer to join our executive team in San Francisco. As
a leader of the Talent and Culture team, you’ll help us think and act in
service of the future of our projects and the Foundation. We’re looking for
a candidate who is mission driven, transparent by default, has a truly
global view (e.g., honors and accepts a plurality of worldviews and
cultures), and can can champion an open and transparent culture.

Role

   -

   Work with the executive team to think and act in service of the future
   of our projects (e.g. What kind of talent will we need? Which kind of
   culture and structure will best support the work? Which systems and tools
   will support WMF best? How will we continuously learn together? How should
   we stretch and support the amazing humans we work with?).
   -

   Champion an open, diverse culture (e.g., How will we lead diversity in
   recruiting? How will we build a diverse culture that reflects the
   multiplicity of views across our projects? How will we celebrate free
   speech, collaboration and create safe spaces?)
   -

   Be a partner in continually leading organizational transformation and
   defining and developing our collective competencies for the future
   -

   Develop a strong, diverse Talent & Culture team guided by a clear vision.
   -

  Co-create the vision and direction for a team of ten. Ensure
  coherence of philosophy across the employee lifecycle.
  -

  Clarify and / or delegate the planning to make it happen: the roles,
  the responsibilities, the tools, the budget.
  -

  Counsel and mentor the team on a broad range of disciplines across
  the employee lifecycle: recruiting, hiring, benefits, compensation,
  onboarding, orienting, training and developing, performance, employee
  relations, promotion and off-boarding.
  -

  Build a pipeline of successors.
  -

   Help recruit and orient high-level talent for the Wikimedia Board of
   Trustees, the Wikimedia Endowment and key executive roles.


Requirements

   -

   Candidate has mastered the role of Chief of Talent and Culture. They
   understand what Talent and Culture is all about: finding and cultivating
   the right talent and building the systems and culture to deliver on a
   mission.
   -

   Candidate has a minimum 10-15 years experience leading talent, culture,
   HR and performance transformations.
   -

   Candidate has a leading edge understanding of employment law, benefits
   and driving diversity in recruiting and managing.
   -

   Candidate can earn the trust of others, has excellent interpersonal
   skills, excellent communication skills, an ability to judge talent and
   people, demonstrates discretion in managing difficult decisions and
   handling sensitive information, and can maintain a wide network of healthy
   successful relationships.
   -

   Candidate must already understand or quickly grasp free culture values
   and the implications for building an open and transparent culture.
   -

   Candidate has experience resolving challenging employee situations, in
   compliance with laws, regulations and Wikimedia policies:


   -

  Strong training and experience in conflict resolution, including
  fact-finding and resolution of internal disputes consistent with legal
  requirements and Wikimedia policies.
  -

  Strong, practical understanding of labor law rights and
  responsibilities.
  -

   Candidate has a Bachelor’s degree. A Master’s degree or equivalent
   experience preferred.
   -

   Candidate demonstrates knowledge and understanding of cultures beyond
   the United States, and the ability to work with an international,
   multicultural 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] 2015 - 2016 Fundraising Report just published

[Stephen LaPorte]

Hi Chris and Lodewijk,

I was asked to follow up here on the questions from October about
country-by-country fundraising data.

We make fundraising decisions, including decisions about what information
we release, based in part on our internal legal assessments in the country.
We don't go into our legal assessments publicly, as it may make it
difficult to keep legal risks and costs low.

We strive to be as open about our fundraising activities as we can.
Compared to nonprofit industry standards, we release more information than
other non-profits tend to, including continent-level breakdowns of
donations, information about revenue channels and testing, and reports from
our fundraising research:

- https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2015-2016_Fundraising_Report

- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_
Reader_Survey_November_2015.pdf

I’m sorry that we can’t give more satisfying answers to your questions, but
in this case we have determined that publishing the requested information
would not be in the best interest of the Wikimedia movement or Foundation.

-- 
Stephen LaPorte
Senior Legal Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation

*NOTICE: As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal and ethical
reasons, I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community
members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more
on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer
.*
___
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] Wikipack Africa call for application open

[James Heilman]

Hey Florence

Exciting to see. Looking forwards to see what sort of uptake a fully
offline model generates.

James

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 5:11 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:

> Information sent to African Wikimedians as well as Wikimedia mailing
> lists. Please do not hesitate to relay to anyone you think could be
> interested.
>
> -
>
> What is Wikipack Africa ?
>
> WikiPack Africa is an action pack containing devices, material and content
> to facilitate the outreach work done by local Wikimedia chapters, local
> Wikimedia User Groups and isolated individuals in African countries. The
> pack allows for ongoing training and contribution even when technology,
> access and electricity outages fail or are not available at all.
> It operates thanks to a Raspberry server and an off-line editing
> environment that mimics the Wikipedia called WikiFundi. WikiFundi, the
> offline editing environment, is to be used in the training of Wikipedians
> and the development of articles by groups.
>
> In addition to WikiFundi, the Raspberry PI will also be loaded with
> off-line copies of Wikipedia, select WikiBooks, Wiktionary and a resource
> pack that will assist with and support contribution to Wikipedia. Other
> outreach and reading resources will also be part of the packs. All digital
> resources and the application platform are available under a free licence.
> When delivered, the Wikipack Africa will also comprise some offline
> materials (posters, leaflets, pull-up banner, tee-shirts, etc.).
>
> The langages implemented are French and English.
>
> More information available at
>
> * https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipack_Africa
> * https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiFundi
> Documentation on meta is available in both langages
>
> The current call for application is meant to be a pilot for the Wikipack
> Africa. We have a limited number of servers available, so please only make
> a request if you really intend to use the pack and are confronted to
> connectivity issues.
>
> Please note: should your request be granted, there will be an obligation
> to  provide details of its use, and usefulness as a tool for outreach in
> the form of a survey. This could be requested several times up to 12 months
> after you have received the unit. This is meant to evaluate the userfulness
> of the tool as well as identify issues or to help us take into account
> improvement requests in a future release.
>
> How to apply
>
> Link : http://tinyurl.com/j78yyk3
>
> Answers may be provided in French or English.
>
> For any further information, please contact Anthere or Isla.
>
>
> Who did that ?
>
> The project has been conceptualised and conceived by Florence Devouard and
> Isla Haddow-Flood.
> The project is run in partnership with Wikimedia CH and the Orange
> Foundation and is primarily implemented by Florence, Isla, and Emmanuel
> Engelhart (the Kiwix master).
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> i/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
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] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Chris Koerner]

I'm speaking as a volunteer, not as WMF staff, if that matters to you.

Adrian Raddatz wrote:
> It should be pretty darn easy to make a policy on user interactions within
> technical spaces. There is certainly a practice which is already followed,
> so just codify it and call it a guideline or a generally accepted
document.
> I would certainly support a page that people can read to find our
> expectations for interactions, and what happens if you're naughty.

That's what a Code of Conduct is. :)

It would be wonderful if it were as easy as you describe, but it hasn't
proven to be.

It's taking longer because the WMF/Board did not initially take the
approach of applying this 'top-down' style to the technical spaces.Those of
us who have been involved (some, like myself before we became staff) want
to do it with community involvement and with thoughtful discussion. Are we
going to get it right the first time around? No, maybe not. Are we trying
to design something with thoughtfulness and flexibility? Yes.

MZMcBride wrote:
> And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you could
> argue that a technical code of conduct is needed.

One could also argue that a disregard for common sense is exactly what
permits individuals to violate our shared expectations of community
behavior.

Yours,
Chris Koerner
clkoerner.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] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[MZMcBride]

Legoktm wrote:
>On 11/21/2016 01:36 AM, Adrian Raddatz wrote:
>> So, are we unable to enforce these things currently? If someone
>>comments on a Phabricator task that user X is a big meanyface, are we
>>unable to act currently because there's no code of conduct so how could
>>they have known otherwise?
>
>The current guideline is
>.
>It only applies to Phabricator, not all technical spaces, like the
>proposed COC.

If we disregard these pages:

* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Code_of_conduct_policy
* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use
* https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Friendly_space_policy

And the many others listed at these places:
* https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Code_of_conduct
* https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct/Draft#See_also

And if we disregard any application of common sense, then yes, you could
argue that a technical code of conduct is needed. When you consider the
actual context, however, it becomes pretty clear that this is unnecessary
bureaucracy. The repeated concerns about outsized influence by
Wikimedia Foundation employees have largely gone ignored.

Quim Gil wrote:
>The discussion about this CoC is no exception, and we have seen WMF
>employees with different opinions and votes at almost every point.

If we discount discussions like "Finalize introduction to "Committee"
section?" on the talk page, I suppose:
.
It's plain to see in discussions like this that every support vote came
from Wikimedia Foundation employees or employees of another Wikimedia
affiliate (WMDE and WMFR). The opposing votes came from volunteers, but
three of the four were struck as being too late.

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, 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikipack Africa call for application open

[Florence Devouard]

Information sent to African Wikimedians as well as Wikimedia mailing 
lists. Please do not hesitate to relay to anyone you think could be 
interested.


-

What is Wikipack Africa ?

WikiPack Africa is an action pack containing devices, material and 
content to facilitate the outreach work done by local Wikimedia 
chapters, local Wikimedia User Groups and isolated individuals in 
African countries. The pack allows for ongoing training and contribution 
even when technology, access and electricity outages fail or are not 
available at all.
It operates thanks to a Raspberry server and an off-line editing 
environment that mimics the Wikipedia called WikiFundi. WikiFundi, the 
offline editing environment, is to be used in the training of 
Wikipedians and the development of articles by groups.


In addition to WikiFundi, the Raspberry PI will also be loaded with 
off-line copies of Wikipedia, select WikiBooks, Wiktionary and a 
resource pack that will assist with and support contribution to 
Wikipedia. Other outreach and reading resources will also be part of the 
packs. All digital resources and the application platform are available 
under a free licence. When delivered, the Wikipack Africa will also 
comprise some offline materials (posters, leaflets, pull-up banner, 
tee-shirts, etc.).


The langages implemented are French and English.

More information available at

* https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipack_Africa
* https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiFundi
Documentation on meta is available in both langages

The current call for application is meant to be a pilot for the Wikipack 
Africa. We have a limited number of servers available, so please only 
make a request if you really intend to use the pack and are confronted 
to connectivity issues.


Please note: should your request be granted, there will be an obligation 
to  provide details of its use, and usefulness as a tool for outreach in 
the form of a survey. This could be requested several times up to 12 
months after you have received the unit. This is meant to evaluate the 
userfulness of the tool as well as identify issues or to help us take 
into account improvement requests in a future release.


How to apply

Link : http://tinyurl.com/j78yyk3

Answers may be provided in French or English.

For any further information, please contact Anthere or Isla.


Who did that ?

The project has been conceptualised and conceived by Florence Devouard 
and Isla Haddow-Flood.
The project is run in partnership with Wikimedia CH and the Orange 
Foundation and is primarily implemented by Florence, Isla, and Emmanuel 
Engelhart (the Kiwix master).



___
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] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Quim Gil]

Hi there,

A bit of context is needed in this discussion about the Code of Conduct for
Wikimedia technical spaces
.

On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 6:45 AM, Pine W  wrote:

> A substantial proportion of the comments on the talk page (and the
> archives) are from WMF employees, not community members.


The dichotomy WMF employees vs community members is false in Wikimedia
technical spaces (and probably beyond, but I'll keep the scope in Wikimedia
tech here). Even the roles of WMF employee / volunteer are quite mixed,
since the WMF has been hiring prolific technical volunteers during years.

While having WMF usernames administrating or simply editing articles in
i.e. English Wikipedia would be basically unthinkable, in Wikimedia
technical spaces is sometimes a norm, sometimes a requirement. Look at the
admin groups of MediaWiki.org, wikitech.wikimedia.org, Phabricator, Gerrit,
many technical mailing lists and IRC channels. Look also at the maintainers
of many software projects and Phabricator projects. look as well in the
list of people who contribute code, bug reports, and other types of
technical contributions.


> I realize, Matt,
> that you have been attempting to recruit broader participation, but it
> looks like the results have been less than one would have hoped.
>

The discussion of the Code of Conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces
 (which happens
in MediaWiki.org, not Phabricator) is probably the process that has been
more widely and continuously advertised in Wikimedia technical spaces. It
is a good example of a tough and quite exhausting long-term discussion that
is likely to drive away many people.

The saddest paradox is that such discussion dynamics work against the main
beneficiaries of the CoC: newcomers, minority groups, and other people with
weaker defenses against harassment and disrespect. If you look at the
participants regularly active in the discussion, you will find that the big
majority (regardless affiliation, myself included) fit in a quite narrow
and homogeneous profile in terms of gender, academic level, English
proficiency, discussion style, color and thickness of skin, stubbornness...

Given WMF's history of clashing with the community about subjects such as
> Superprotect, VisualEditor, and ACTRIAL


Can you provide examples of such WMF vs volunteers clashes in Wikimedia
technical spaces?

The toughest and most polarized discussions that I recall had WMF and
volunteers in both sides. In fact, it is not uncommon to see opposition to
"a WMF move" coming from WMF members, in their volunteer or professional
roles.

The discussion about this CoC is no exception, and we have seen WMF
employees with different opinions and votes at almost every point.

it seems to me that while WMF
> participation in discussions such as this is good, the high proportion of
> WMF representation on the talk page makes the resulting document more
> likely to reflect the view of WMF and its employees rather than the larger
> community.


Can you specify where in the draft do you see "the view of WMF and its
employees rather than the larger
community"?

We have been discussing this draft for more than a year now, and almost
every sentence has been reviewed and discussed. My main concern (inspired
by other promoters of this Code) has been to reflect the view and the
interests of the potential beneficiaries of the CoC. In fact, many of the
toughest and longest discussions were not centered around the interests of
these existing and potential community members at all.


A bit more context to address other replies to this thread:

Action against harassment and disrespect is already taken in Wikimedia
technical spaces, partly thanks to a social pressure that (I dare to say)
is less tolerant to such disruptions than many Wikimedia communities,
partly thanks to the many admins/maintainers in many different spaces, each
of them with different tools to address harassment. A subset of the
Technical Communication team

handles the reports that we receive, and recently we started publishing a
metric of cases handled in the Community Engagement quarterly reviews

.

All this is happening thanks to the initiative of many individuals with
different affiliations (for instance, those who participated in the writing
of the Bugzilla (now Phabricator) etiquette
).
However, it is happening in a quite ad hoc way (i.e. nobody decided that
the Technical Collaboration team would handle harassment reports, we just
kept receiving them and decided to do something about them).

The Code of Conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces should provide a common
framework for all the different 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Legoktm]

Hi,

On 11/21/2016 01:36 AM, Adrian Raddatz wrote:
> So, are we unable to enforce these things currently? If someone comments on
> a Phabricator task that user X is a big meanyface, are we unable to act
> currently because there's no code of conduct so how could they have known
> otherwise?

The current guideline is
.
It only applies to Phabricator, not all technical spaces, like the
proposed COC.

-- Legoktm

___
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] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Fæ]

WMF staff turning into unelected IRC police, with the power to globally ban
volunteers with no appeal process, and no transparency, is not 'legit'. It
abandons respect for community consensus.

WMF police will be divisive, not a real plan to tackle harassment.

Fae

On 21 Nov 2016 09:29, "Vi to"  wrote:

> I think they want a code of conduct as a background to any kind of
> enforcement, which sounds fairly legit.
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-11-21 2:33 GMT+01:00 Adrian Raddatz :
>
> > Oh, and similar to WereSpielChequers, I agree that better enforcement
> > methods would be far more useful than spending staff time and money
> > worrying about the codes of conduct. I understand that they are all the
> > rage on the west coast of the US these days, but it's not going to help
> us
> > finally stop someone who is using proxies to create more accounts to
> harass
> > someone. It's not hard to see that with access to proxies and mobile IP
> > ranges, someone can engage in sockpuppetry and abuse of our wikis
> > indefinitely.
> >
> > The WMF has made progress on this recently, but there is still nothing to
> > deter someone from engaging in prolonged campaigns of on-wiki harassment
> > using sockpuppets. Maybe it's time to think about a more strict
> account-->
> > operator connection, such as requiring email addresses on new account
> > creations and a method of checking accounts by email.
> >
> > Adrian Raddatz
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Adrian Raddatz 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Similar to Vito, the safe space/code of conduct crowd has never
> > > demonstrated that any of these principles are not already held and
> > enforced
> > > across our projects.
> > >
> > > Adrian Raddatz
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Vi to  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Same here, ofc.
> > >> I still cannot understand how there could be online communities
> refusing
> > >> these very basic principles.
> > >>
> > >> Vito
> > >>
> > >> 2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :
> > >>
> > >> > On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy <
> > >> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and
> > >> murder
> > >> > > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except
> > maybe,
> > >> > > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC
> channels
> > >> in
> > >> > which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor
> > >> ones).
> > >> > I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring
> > that.
> > >> > ___
> > >> > 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
> > ,
> > >> >  unsubscribe>
> > >> >
> > >> ___
> > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > >> i/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] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Adrian Raddatz]

So, are we unable to enforce these things currently? If someone comments on
a Phabricator task that user X is a big meanyface, are we unable to act
currently because there's no code of conduct so how could they have known
otherwise?

It should be pretty darn easy to make a policy on user interactions within
technical spaces. There is certainly a practice which is already followed,
so just codify it and call it a guideline or a generally accepted document.
I would certainly support a page that people can read to find our
expectations for interactions, and what happens if you're naughty. Instead,
it has been months (years?) of debate over wording and enforcement, when
there has been no demonstrated deficiency in how we currently deal with it.
Except of course the technical limitations, which they could have been
spending this time/money on fixing.

Also, I think I misread your first comment. I'm sorry for referencing it in
my comment then; I wasn't trying to "mould" your opinion to support my own.

Adrian Raddatz

On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 1:29 AM, Vi to  wrote:

> I think they want a code of conduct as a background to any kind of
> enforcement, which sounds fairly legit.
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-11-21 2:33 GMT+01:00 Adrian Raddatz :
>
> > Oh, and similar to WereSpielChequers, I agree that better enforcement
> > methods would be far more useful than spending staff time and money
> > worrying about the codes of conduct. I understand that they are all the
> > rage on the west coast of the US these days, but it's not going to help
> us
> > finally stop someone who is using proxies to create more accounts to
> harass
> > someone. It's not hard to see that with access to proxies and mobile IP
> > ranges, someone can engage in sockpuppetry and abuse of our wikis
> > indefinitely.
> >
> > The WMF has made progress on this recently, but there is still nothing to
> > deter someone from engaging in prolonged campaigns of on-wiki harassment
> > using sockpuppets. Maybe it's time to think about a more strict
> account-->
> > operator connection, such as requiring email addresses on new account
> > creations and a method of checking accounts by email.
> >
> > Adrian Raddatz
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Adrian Raddatz 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Similar to Vito, the safe space/code of conduct crowd has never
> > > demonstrated that any of these principles are not already held and
> > enforced
> > > across our projects.
> > >
> > > Adrian Raddatz
> > >
> > > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Vi to  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Same here, ofc.
> > >> I still cannot understand how there could be online communities
> refusing
> > >> these very basic principles.
> > >>
> > >> Vito
> > >>
> > >> 2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :
> > >>
> > >> > On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy <
> > >> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and
> > >> murder
> > >> > > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except
> > maybe,
> > >> > > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC
> channels
> > >> in
> > >> > which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor
> > >> ones).
> > >> > I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring
> > that.
> > >> > ___
> > >> > 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
> > ,
> > >> >  unsubscribe>
> > >> >
> > >> ___
> > >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wik
> > >> i/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] Discussion about proposed Technical Code of Conduct (TCC)

[Vi to]

I think they want a code of conduct as a background to any kind of
enforcement, which sounds fairly legit.

Vito

2016-11-21 2:33 GMT+01:00 Adrian Raddatz :

> Oh, and similar to WereSpielChequers, I agree that better enforcement
> methods would be far more useful than spending staff time and money
> worrying about the codes of conduct. I understand that they are all the
> rage on the west coast of the US these days, but it's not going to help us
> finally stop someone who is using proxies to create more accounts to harass
> someone. It's not hard to see that with access to proxies and mobile IP
> ranges, someone can engage in sockpuppetry and abuse of our wikis
> indefinitely.
>
> The WMF has made progress on this recently, but there is still nothing to
> deter someone from engaging in prolonged campaigns of on-wiki harassment
> using sockpuppets. Maybe it's time to think about a more strict account-->
> operator connection, such as requiring email addresses on new account
> creations and a method of checking accounts by email.
>
> Adrian Raddatz
>
> On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Adrian Raddatz 
> wrote:
>
> > Similar to Vito, the safe space/code of conduct crowd has never
> > demonstrated that any of these principles are not already held and
> enforced
> > across our projects.
> >
> > Adrian Raddatz
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 20, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Vi to  wrote:
> >
> >> Same here, ofc.
> >> I still cannot understand how there could be online communities refusing
> >> these very basic principles.
> >>
> >> Vito
> >>
> >> 2016-11-21 0:57 GMT+01:00 Alex Monk :
> >>
> >> > On 20 November 2016 at 13:35, Jonathan Cardy <
> >> werespielchequ...@gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > The nastiest trolling, personal attacks and certainly the rape and
> >> murder
> >> > > threats will get people blocked anywhere in the movement except
> maybe,
> >> > > definitely in the past but hopefully not today, on IRC.
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > I would kick+block people doing that sort of thing in the IRC channels
> >> in
> >> > which I am an op (e.g. #mediawiki, #wikimedia-labs and various minor
> >> ones).
> >> > I would be shocked to see ops of other channels willingly ignoring
> that.
> >> > ___
> >> > 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/wik
> >> i/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,