Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

(posting in my volunteer capacity) Echoing Andrew's, SJ's, and Ziko's comments, I will add that perhaps all it would take is some collective energy to endorse these long-standing observations, and signal to WMF that we no longer have to pretend Wikinews is a worthwhile model (as SJ, Paulo, and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 4:23 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers < jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Andrew > > It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies that > make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a > poor fit for a news-gathering

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Hello, Some years ago, some volunteers have proposed a new Wikimedia wiki. It did not turn out as expected. That‘s okay, the movement should try out thing from time to time. But this wiki should not be seen as an eternal obligation to be kept. Kind regards Ziko Samuel Klein schrieb am Di. 16.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Jennifer -- as you say, there is a contradiction here in the self-image and internal narrative of the projects and movement. A classic branding issue ;) * On the one hand, we lack clear, consistent language to talk about topical subprojects (what do you call 'the Current Events specialists on the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Andrew It seems to me that you're saying that, on the one hand, the policies that make Wikipedia work well as an encyclopaedia (NOR, RS, V, NORUSH) are a poor fit for a news-gathering operation and on the other hand, Wikipedia is a success as a news-gathering operation. These seem inconsistent

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:27 PM Jennifer Pryor-Summers < jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia seems > to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with its > encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

I concur with Phoebe and others that the time for such a change was 10 or 15 years ago, and would not be appropriate or productive now. One thing that this corporate rebranding after our most popular product would erase is the "Wikimedia movement" - a social movement that is the leading modern

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

Hi all, I'll try to be brief. At an intuitive level I'm against implementing this particular proposal: Use Wikipedia as the central movement brand rather than Wikimedia. After reading this thread and having conversations related to the subject with others this are my thoughts around it: - Timing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

The WMF should not sort out any demarcation issues. In fact, it should not sort out anything at all in the Movement. The WMF is administered by the Movement, and it's main purpose and mission is to serve it, not do dictate anything there. That is a boundary that should never be crossed. Best

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Why is it not consistent? If the event is encyclopedic, it can (and should) be treated by Wikipedia, same way as any other subject. I confess I've never understood the mantra of "Wikipedia is not a source of news", when it may be, indeed, and with great advantage, as it provides *context*, a

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

Jim > I would like to comment on the search and requirement > criteria. In particular, I'd like to know [...] I would love to know any of > this far more than anything about branding. > Yes, but what would you *do* with the answers to all those questions? You're not on the search committee, so

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Dan Wikinews may not be doing too well, but (English-language) Wikipedia seems to have taken up a news-gathering role not entirely consistent with its encyclopediac mission: perhaps that's the reason. Maybe the WMF should sort out the demarcation issues. JPS On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 10:38 AM

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

When I joined Wikimedia in 2009 I also tried WikiNews, which looked yet another fantastic Wikimedia project. I soon realized, however, that it was just a repeater of CC-BY sources of news, with very residual (if any) proper production. When an handcrafted news-piece I've made was merged with one

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Annual Report 2018: Wikimedia Community User Group Turkey

Wow! That you and your team continue to do some amazing works despite the issues in Turkey is something I really appreciate. Thank you so much for this report. Regards, Isaac. On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 1:25 PM Eileen Hershenov #WeMissTurkey -- so much. > > > Eileen B. Hershenov > Of Counsel >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

Jennifer, I would like to comment on the search and requirement criteria. In particular, I'd like to know whether the Foundation is interested in reinforcing their privacy infrastructure, and whether that is more or less important than being able to provide personally identifiable information to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Annual Report 2018: Wikimedia Community User Group Turkey

Basak, Congrats on your achievements in an almost impossible situation! We all appreciate your efforts and continued persistence regardless of circumstances. Waiting for the moment when you'll be freed <3 Best to all of you, Shani. --- *Shani

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Annual Report 2018: Wikimedia Community User Group Turkey

#WeMissTurkey -- so much. Eileen B. Hershenov Of Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 1 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600 San Francisco, CA 94104

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Annual Report 2018: Wikimedia Community User Group Turkey

Well done Basak, thank you for all this group work. #WeMissTurkey Hugs, Camelia -- *Camelia Boban* *| Java EE Developer |* *Affiliations Committee - **Wikimedia *Foundation Coordinator - Diversity Working Group for Wikimedia Strategy 2030 Chair & co-founder - WikiDonne User Group *| WikiDonne

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Annual Report 2018: Wikimedia Community User Group Turkey

Thank you, Basak and the rest of the group! You have been doing good work under unfortunate and difficult circumstances. Keep it up, and we continue to hope for the lifting of the ban. Cheers, Asaf On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 11:09 PM Basak wrote: > This message is not encrypted but sent

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

** correction - New readers (audiences and global partnerships) are working in North Africa, Middle East, South America and India at the moment. On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 12:15 PM Joseph Seddon wrote: > You keep mentioning this Anglo-Centric / Wikipedia centric focus of the > WMF. > > WMDE

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

You keep mentioning this Anglo-Centric / Wikipedia centric focus of the WMF. WMDE receives substantial monetary support from WMF for Wikidata. Only two years ago dedicated grant funded work was made specific for Wikidata on Commons for both WMF and WMDE. New Editors are working with the Korea and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

Hi Gerard, > So lets focus on what *you* consider the big > difficult questions making this rebranding issue not so relevant.. > Well, there is a list of about 90 scoping questions from the movement strategy process. Many of these questions in fact overlap or are alternative ways of asking the

[Wikimedia-l] Supporting Wikinews [was: Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals]

Splitting off the Wikinews discussion from the branding discussion... On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 07:52, Jennifer Pryor-Summers < jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote: > Compared to Wikitribune it is! But more importantly, if Wikinews is not > thriving, then why not? Does it lack resources? What

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

Hoi, Fine. Obviously we disagree on what we read in the same text. Now what would be the "correct way" to address a perceived sense of superiority ? Thanks, GerardM On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 11:24, Dan Garry (Deskana) wrote: > On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 10:14, Gerard Meijssen > wrote: > > >

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

On Mon, 15 Apr 2019 at 21:09, James Salsman wrote: > I withdraw any opinions and suggestions about the branding discussion, > and don't intend to continue participating in it. Instead, I would > like to have a more substantive discussion: > > (1) I ask that the CTO search team please publish

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 10:14, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > Thank you for your sense of superiority.. It's not helpful to sarcastically "thank" someone like this. I don't find Chris to have had a sense of superiority in his email, but even if he had, this is not the correct way to address

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

Hoi, Thank you for your sense of superiority.. the views on this list are "easy to have"and "not the big, difficult questions". These are some big difficult questions I can come up with: - how will we deal with the existing bias that is Anglo-American.. - how will we deal with the existing

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

In many ways yes - not that branding isnt important, but these two conversations are a great example of people engaging with the narrow questions that are easy to have a view on, and not the big, difficult questions. (Though also, there is nothing more interesting on the working group email lists

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

Andrew Lih provided a couple of days ago a link to his excellent analysis of ten years ago, but in short - Wikinews has a very different nature that all other Wikimedia projects. Wikipedia, or say Wikivoyage or Commons are incremental - you can add a paragraph of text or an image, walk away, come

Re: [Wikimedia-l] branding is bikeshedding, how about CTO criteria or working group lists instead?

Jim You ask that "the CTO search team please publish their search and requirement criteria" -- what would you, or the public at large, do with that information? JPS ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reviewing our brand system for our 2030 goals

On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 3:49 AM Paulo Santos Perneta < paulospern...@gmail.com> wrote: > I wouldn't describe Wikinews as a success case, though. > > Paulo > Compared to Wikitribune it is! But more importantly, if Wikinews is not thriving, then why not? Does it lack resources? What could or