Re: [Wikimedia-l] De-Recognition of Affiliates with Long-standing Non-Compliance

It looks like there are many chapters and orgs at risk of being denied a renewal. I'm curious about how you decided who to label non-compliant and who you did not. I notice that WM Armenia appears to have had no reports or activity (other than 2015 wrap up information) in 2016. Are they

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

I did not see many arguing that the WMF must be neutral; the debate is not about political neutrality, but about political activity outside the mission of the WMF. Few argue, on the substance or even principle, that the WMF's statement about the travel ban is wrong or misplaced - merely that the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] [PRESS RELEASE] Wikimedia Foundation receives $500, 000 from the Craig Newmark Foundation and craigslist Charitable Fund to support a healthy and inclusive

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:17 AM, Lodewijk wrote: What I am curious about, is whether there are also efforts ongoing that are focused on influencing community behavior in a more preventive manner. On 01/27/2017 09:54 AM, Danny Horn wrote: Your idea for using

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Mike Godwin wrote: > (2) As I put it many times many years ago in the years before and > after the SOPA/PIPA blackout, there are few POVs *less* neutral than > the commitment to give all the information in the world to everyone > for free. We

Re: [Wikimedia-l] De-Recognition of Affiliates with Long-standing Non-Compliance

It looks like the page Maor refers to near the end there is this one: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Reports Joe On Sat, 4 Feb 2017 at 15:06 Maor Malul wrote: > Dear all, > > Recognition as a Wikimedia affiliate - a chapter, thematic organization, > or user group - is a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [discovery] Interactive Team putting work on pause

"Rogol", As you may have noticed, threaded discussions become difficult for me to visually navigate after a while. Thus, the color. On Sat, Jan 28, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Rogol Domedonfors wrote: > Anna > > > > To be clear, I’m engaged in understanding your perspective. I’m >

[Wikimedia-l] De-Recognition of Affiliates with Long-standing Non-Compliance

Dear all, Recognition as a Wikimedia affiliate - a chapter, thematic organization, or user group - is a privilege that allows an independent group to officially use the Wikimedia name to further the Wikimedia mission. While most Wikimedia affiliates adhere to the basic compliance standards

Re: [Wikimedia-l] don't run away from the mess we've made, fix it (Re: Concerns in general)

“Rogol”, Now that you’ve told me on another thread that “Rogol” is a fictitious name, I feel that I’ve entered a world of international intrigue. Lord knows my Saturday could use the excitement. Sometimes it may take some time before I can respond. They keep me fairly busy here. On Fri, Jan

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 13:35:30 +0100 Yaroslav Blanter wrote: Well, there were speakers who were not able to attend Wikimanias in Haifa and Cairo, to start with, because of similar bans, and the general response then was "Whatever place we choose, someone is always

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

Well, there were speakers who were not able to attend Wikimanias in Haifa and Cairo, to start with, because of similar bans, and the general response then was "Whatever place we choose, someone is always discriminated". I am not sure whether this is a healthy attitude or not, but I do not see why

Re: [Wikimedia-l] February 2: Update on Wikimedia movement strategy process (#5)

Thanks for this update. Most especially, it's interesting to know the renewed focus on the African community. Thanks alot for attending Wiki Indaba as well! Regards. Sam. Wikimedia UserGroup Nigeria On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 3:59 AM, Katherine Maher wrote: > Hello everyone!

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

Katherine: Thank you, that was beautifully written. We all have our work cut out for us to preserve the free sharing of knowledge and experience across borders, and the very notion of reliable sources. Mike, your perspective is deeply welcome. Sharing the world's knowledge is fundamentally

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

Well spoken Mike. Greetings Ting Am 04.02.2017 um 15:58 schrieb Mike Godwin: I don't respond to Wikimedia-l discussion very often, but I think this debate comes up often enough that it's worth it for me to explain and elaborate on my own positions. (1) I understand WP:NPOV to be a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

I don't respond to Wikimedia-l discussion very often, but I think this debate comes up often enough that it's worth it for me to explain and elaborate on my own positions. (1) I understand WP:NPOV to be a rule/guideline about content, particularly Wikipedia content. I do not believe it is a rule

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Politics

I agree absolutely with this. All Wikipedians are political and we pontificate to the world quite happily while following a complex set of agreed rules. To believe that Wikipedia has a neutral point of view is like believing there is no systemic bias in the academic world. The gateway that anyone