Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] Knowledge Integrity: A proposed Wikimedia Foundation cross-departmental program for 2018-2019

[geni]

On 17 April 2018 at 09:39, David Cuenca Tudela  wrote:
> Additionally I think it would be interesting to have some research done on
> which references are DISPLAYED or CLICKED the most on several Wikipedias.
> We know already which sources are cited the most, but on which sources do
> users hover their mouse the most? Can we also identify which statements are
> involved?

Absolutely not. Leave that kind of spying to advertising companies and
three letter agencies. We have standards.



> Finally I believe it would be that a tool to assess the
> openness

Look for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Open_access


>/accessibility of the sources of any given article could be really
> interesting.



Would turn into an argument over definitions. For example is the
Mabinogion accessible? Public domain, copies can be found on various
websites but I don't speak welsh. Limiting it to English gets to the
next problem. Is this accessible:

https://www.aanda.org/articles/aa/full_html/2014/11/aa21621-13/aa21621-13.html

Its in English but I don't have a degree in physics.

Where there are more obvious limits it gets more complicated. You may
be tempted to lump all paywalls together is it really fair to lump
something that costs €1 for total access in with something that
charges $40 for one article. Does the currency it charges in make a
difference?

Books too have their fun aspects. Try automating judging the relative
accessibility of Birmingham's Electric Dustcarts and 7000 years of
jewelry.



-- 
geni

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Chapters] New Wikimedia Italia board and activities

[Lukas Mezger]

Dear Lorenzo,
Caro Lorenzo,

Thanks for sharing these news. Congratulations to the new members of the
board of Wikimedia Italia! Also, it's great to hear that so many members
participated in the general assembly. Good luck all for the work ahead!
Grazie per queste notizie. Auguri ai nuovi membri del consiglio direttivo
di Wikimedia Italia! È bello sentire che così tanti soci abbiano
partecipato all'assemblea generale. In bocca al lupo tutti per il lavoro
futuro!

Kind regards, and see you in Berlin!
Tanti saluti, e a presto a Berlino!

Lukas


--



Dr. Lukas Mezger
Mitglied des Präsidiums / member of the Supervisory Board

Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23
-24 |
10963 Berlin
Tel. (030) 219 158 260
http://wikimedia.de

Stellen Sie sich eine Welt vor, in der jeder Mensch an der Menge allen
Wissens frei teilhaben kann. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
http://spenden.wikimedia.de

Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.


2018-04-17 8:56 GMT+02:00 Lorenzo Losa :

> Dear all,
> on April 7th, Wikimedia Italia held its general assembly, where a new
> board has been elected. It is composed as follows:
> * Lorenzo Losa, President
> * Valerio Perticone, Vice-president
> * Carlo Benini, Secretary
> * Saverio G. Malatesta, Treasurer
> * Maurizio Napolitano
>
> I wish to thank Federico Leva, Giuseppe Profiti and Paola Liliana
> Buttiglione, who ended their term, for their invaluable work in the board.
>
> The general assembly drew a very good participation, with 89 voting
> members (the most participated general assembly in the last ten years!),
> and unanimously approved the 2017 annual report (currently in Italian only;
> an English version is planned).
> 
>
> A few highlights from the 2017 report:
> * Two new WIRs have started working at the Ministry of Culture (ICAR and
> ICBSA). Some portals of the central archives administration have already
> adopted the CC-BY-SA-4.0 license as well as the public domain charter! For
> more links see:
> 
> * We got more than 3.000 researchers to archive their articles in green
> open access (in just two months!):
>  rs-make-over-3000-articles-green-open-access-via-dissemin/>
> * OpenStreetMap activities are strengthening, reaching more than double
> the people we expected.
>
> From the structural point of view, since July 2017, after almost a year of
> intense discussions with members and staff, we have started implementing
> changes while going towards a reduced workload for the board. We have
> mutually agreed to part ways with our former ED. Since then, three new
> employees have started working with us: Giovanna Ranci, for the education
> program; Marta Arosio, for GLAM partnerships; Teresa Scorza, for
> administration and bookkeeping.
>
> Looking forward, the 2018 budget and annual plan, written by 37 members
> and employees together, is increasing the support for Wikimedia volunteers
> (financially and otherwise), while reducing expenses for salaries and
> administrative services.
> 
>
> Best regards,
> Lorenzo
>
>
> ___
> Chapters mailing list
> chapt...@wikimedia.ch
> https://intern.wikimedia.ch/lists/listinfo/chapters
>
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikidata] Knowledge Integrity: A proposed Wikimedia Foundation cross-departmental program for 2018-2019

[David Cuenca Tudela]

Hi Dario&Jake,

Thanks for sharing the plan. Any possibility to include in the plan a
system to archive all reference URLs and external identifiers linked from
Wikidata?
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T143488

Additionally I think it would be interesting to have some research done on
which references are DISPLAYED or CLICKED the most on several Wikipedias.
We know already which sources are cited the most, but on which sources do
users hover their mouse the most? Can we also identify which statements are
involved? It could be used to expand them, improve them, or add more
context.

Finally I believe it would be that a tool to assess the
openness/accessibility of the sources of any given article could be really
interesting.

Regards,
Micru


On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 2:32 AM, Dario Taraborelli <
dtarabore...@wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> (apologies for cross-posting)
>
> We’re sharing a proposed program
> 
>  for the Wikimedia Foundation’s upcoming fiscal year
> 
>  (2018-19) and *would love to hear from you*. This plan builds
> extensively on projects and initiatives driven by volunteer contributors
> and organizations in the Wikimedia movement, so your input is critical.
>
> Why a “knowledge integrity” program?
>
> Increased global attention is directed at the problem of misinformation
> and how media consumers are struggling to distinguish fact from fiction.
> Meanwhile, thanks to the sources they cite, Wikimedia projects are uniquely
> positioned as a reliable gateway to accessing quality information in the
> broader knowledge ecosystem. How can we mobilize these citations as a
> resource and turn them into a broader, linked infrastructure of trust to
> serve the entire internet?  Free knowledge grounds itself in verifiability
> and transparent attribution policies. Let’s look at 4 data points as
> motivating stories:
>
>- Wikipedia sends tens of millions of people to external sources each
>year. We want to conduct research to understand why and how readers leave
>our site.
>- The Internet Archive has fixed over 4 million dead links on
>Wikipedia. We want to enable instantaneous archiving of every link on all
>Wikipedias to ensure the long-term preservation of the sources Wikipedians
>cite.
>- #1Lib1Ref reaches 6 million people on social media. We want to bring
>#1Lib1Ref to Wikidata and more languages, spreading the message that
>references improve quality.
>- 33% of Wikidata items represent sources (journals, books, works). We
>want to strengthen community efforts to build a high-quality, collaborative
>database of all cited and citable sources.
>
> A 5-year vision
>
> Our 5-year vision for the Knowledge Integrity program is to establish
> Wikimedia as the hub of a federated, trusted knowledge ecosystem. We plan
> to get there by creating:
>
>- A roadmap to a mature, technically and socially scalable, central
>repository of sources.
>- Developed network of partners and technical collaborators to
>contribute to and reuse data about citations.
>- Increased public awareness of Wikimedia’s vital role in information
>literacy and fact-checking.
>
>
> 5 directions for 2018-2019
>
> We have identified 5 levers of Knowledge Integrity: research,
> infrastructure and tooling, access and preservation, outreach, and
> awareness. Here’s what we want to do with each:
>
>
>1. Continue to conduct research to understand how readers access
>sources and how to help contributors improve citation quality.
>2. Improve tools for linking information to external sources,
>catalogs, and repositories.
>3. Ensure resources cited across Wikimedia projects are accessible in
>perpetuity.
>4. Grow outreach and partnerships to scale community and technical
>efforts to improve the structure and quality of citations.
>5. Increase public awareness of the processes Wikimedians follow to
>verify information and articulate a collective vision for a trustable web.
>
>
> Who is involved?
>
> The core teams involved in this proposal are:
>
>- Wikimedia Foundation Technology’s Research Team
>- Wikimedia Foundation Community Engagement’s Programs team (Wikipedia
>Library)
>- Wikimedia Deutschland Engineering’s Wikidata team
>
>
> The initiative also spans across an ecosystem of possible partners
> including the Internet Archive, ContentMine, Crossref, OCLC, OpenCitations,
> and Zotero. It is further made possible by funders including the Sloan,
> Gordon and Betty Moore, and Simons Foundations who have been supporting the
> WikiCite initiative to date.
>
> How you can participate
>
> You can read the fine details of our proposed year-1 plan, and provide
> your feedback, on mediawiki.org: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_
>

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia

[Anthony Cole]

Thank you, Philippe and Joseph.

On Tue, 17 Apr 2018 at 8:22 am, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:

>  Hey Anthony.
>
> These emails came in on a weekend and today is a WMF holiday so I suspect
> it'll be another 24 hours or so before a response will get to you :)
>
> Regards
> Seddon
>
> On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 1:15 AM, Philippe Beaudette  >
> wrote:
>
> > I suspect that the ad in question is a freebie, donated through Google's
> > giveaway to nonprofits. If so there is a point person at wmf (maybe in
> the
> > advancement team?) Who would know for sure.
> >
> > Philippe
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 5:10 PM Anthony Cole 
> wrote:
> >
> > > I just googled "wikipedia" again and that ad is still coming up.  (I’m
> in
> > > Australia.) When you click the link in the ad it takes you (via 3 or 4
> > > redirects) to wikipedia.org with the word "paid" in the search field.
> > [1]
> > >  When you click the Google maps link below the ad text it, strangely,
> > takes
> > > you to the location of a suburban Kmart store. I'm finding it harder to
> > > believe this is sanctioned by WMF. Anyway, I’d appreciate it if someone
> > > from the WMF could chime in on this.
> > >
> > > 1.  https://instagram.com/p/BhpnGuehzhw/
> > >
> > > On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 at 9:48 pm, Robert Fernandez <
> wikigamal...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > "🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥The encyclopedia of evil people, by evil people, for
> evil
> > > > people 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥" + a winking Baphomet as logo
> > > >
> > > > I think we should change this to our slogan just for April 1.
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 11:31 AM, Vi to 
> > wrote:
> > > > > "🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥The encyclopedia of evil people, by evil people, for
> evil
> > > > > people 🔥 🔥 🔥 🔥" + a winking Baphomet as logo
> > > > >
> > > > > I find close to pointless derailing any discussion into a
> > > > incircumstantial
> > > > > series of tirades.
> > > > >
> > > > > Vito
> > > > >
> > > > > 2018-04-15 16:21 GMT+02:00 Leigh Thelmadatter <
> osama...@hotmail.com
> > >:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Not just English Wikipedia. All of the projects are hostile to
> > > > "outsiders"
> > > > >> Those not in English might even be worse for several reasons
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Enviado desde mi LG de Telcel
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -- Original message--
> > > > >> From: Robert Fernandez
> > > > >> Date: Sun, Apr 15, 2018 9:17 AM
> > > > >> To: Wikimedia Mailing List;
> > > > >> Cc:
> > > > >> Subject:Re: [Wikimedia-l] The fact-checked encyclopedia
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Considering the barriers to entry, growing thicket of policies,
> > > > >> organized group harassment, and open hostility on the English
> > > > >> Wikipedia, I'm not sure we can even call it "the encyclopedia
> anyone
> > > > >> can edit" anymore.  So I'd say fact-checked is a more accurate and
> > > > >> relevant claim these days.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 8:53 AM, Anthony Cole <
> ahcole...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > I just googled “wikipedia” and the first result was a Google ad
> > > > linking
> > > > >> to
> > > > >> > wikipedia.org.[1] It calls Wikipedia the fact-checked
> > encyclopedia.
> > > We
> > > > >> used
> > > > >> > to call it the encyclopedia anyone can edit. The latter seems
> more
> > > > honest
> > > > >> > than this new formulation which to me implies a degree of
> > > reliability
> > > > and
> > > > >> > oversight I'm not sure we can ethically assert. I missed the
> > > > discussion
> > > > >> > about this new self-description. Did it happen on meta? Is
> anyone
> > > else
> > > > >> > uncomfortabe with this?
> > > > >> > --
> > > > >> > Anthony Cole
> > > > >> > ___
> > > > >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > >> > 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/
> > > > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > >> 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/
> > > > >> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > >> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
> >